LabourRossendale and Darwen

Andy MacNae MP: speeches

How to read this

Hansard records words spoken in Parliament. A contribution does not by itself show that policy changed.

Most recent 12 months, since 30 Sept 2025. Newest first within each group. Follow the original source for full context.

Speeches

16 Jul 2026 · Local Government Reorganisation · Hansard source
More
I have long been a proponent of the principles of LGR, which Lancashire and my constituents have desperately needed for a long time. It is a chance to reinvent local government. However, today, in respect of a decision made by the Secretary of State, I have to associate myself with the comments made by my parliamentary neighbours, my hon. Friends the Members for Burnley (Oliver Ryan) and for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith). I cannot accept the suggestion—the claim—that these boundaries match the natural economics of Lancashire. It will leave us with the most deprived local authority area in the country. We are good at making the best of things, so I ask the Secretary of State to work with me and us to bring in the much more significant capacity and capability funding that we need to reverse that deprivation and catch up with neighbouring places, such as Manchester. Will he meet me and east Lancashire colleagues to drive this forward with urgency?
16 Jul 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source
More
My right hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) has made it clear that reindustrialisation will be a key priority for this Government, but in order to be meaningful this must be done with true ambition, delivering good jobs, hope and opportunity in every part of the country, including the small towns of Rossendale and Darwen. To achieve that, we need to move beyond city-centric economics and the outdated assumption that our future is simply as a service economy. We must recognise that national renewal and resilience come from making more things in more places. Will the Leader of the House agree to a debate in Government time on how we can achieve that?
8 Jul 2026 · NHS Corridor Care · Hansard source
More
The crucial thing is that we recognise the scale of the challenge and work together to solve it. This needs to be a shared mission on behalf of our residents, our friends and our families. In a year’s time, I intend to be standing here after we have together ended corridor care in Blackburn A&E for good, and I hope the Minister and the Department of Health continue to share this commitment. This is a moral imperative, and together we must deliver the care and dignity that our residents deserve.
8 Jul 2026 · NHS Corridor Care · Hansard source
More
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting (Dr Allin-Khan) for securing this debate and all my esteemed colleagues for covering the issue so brilliantly and with such expertise. You will be glad to hear, Madam Deputy Speaker, that that allows me to be brief and to focus on Blackburn A&E. Blackburn A&E is one of the busiest in the country, serving east Lancashire. It has been one of the starkest examples of corridor care, and I could tell so many stories of constituents suffering the indignities and poor care that are the inevitable consequence of that. There is the 70-year-old lady with spinal cancer who was stuck there for 72 hours; the young woman who was a historical sexual assault victim, physically shaking with fear at being left in a corridor surrounded by men; or the 90-year-old with dementia and double incontinence, reliant on her daughter to change and clean her, and desperate for privacy, comfort and reassurance. I too have been there, unable to walk after a fall, for 13 hours overnight in a corridor that felt like a war zone, next to an old lady who was in constant pain, fearful and alone, crying out for her family—just one voice among many. Corridor care is at best undignified and at worst heartless, heartbreaking and cruel. Its normalisation is a scandal and is one of the starkest examples of a health system failed and broken by Tory austerity. We must end it, and I am pleased to say that in Blackburn we are finally seeing progress.
8 Jul 2026 · NHS Corridor Care · Hansard source
More
The investment in prevention and in repairing the massive damage done by the previous Government to our valued health system is crucial and fundamental. We are finally seeing progress in Blackburn, and that is because of additional resources and support from NHS England and the Government’s getting it right first time initiative. East Lancashire Hospitals NHS trust and the leadership must be praised for that. They have been working hard and with real focus to address the underlying drivers of corridor care, such as safe and timely discharge, and the presence of senior clinicians. This is not about quick fixes but about looking to end the practice for good. So far, waits of 12 hours-plus have reduced by 18%. That means there is a long way to go, and myself and fellow east Lancashire MPs are working with the trust both to challenge progress and to argue for the resources needed to do the job.
30 Jun 2026 · Culture, Media And Sport · Hansard source
More
As we have this debate about budgets and the figures being spent on sport, one key question keeps leaping out. As has been said by colleagues, we know that sport and physical activity is one of the things that can best maintain good health and prevent ill health. However, when we look at the numbers—hundreds of millions spent on sport, and hundreds of billions on the costs of ill health and welfare—we realise that we are stuck in a cycle of spending billions on ill health and worklessness and hardly anything to prevent it. The points set out in the “Game On” report and by the Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, the hon. Member for Gosport (Dame Caroline Dinenage), are well made, so I will leap past the questions on the quantum of spend and instead ask about the barriers that prevent us from doing what we know we should. First, I have a question for the Treasury. We seem to be stuck in our approach and attitude towards prevention spending. It is time to ask some fundamental questions about how we address that, looking at the mechanisms that the Office for Budget Responsibility uses to measure spend and how it scores those initiatives, and how we think about prevention within the fiscal rules. Fragmentation has been mentioned. We spend £3.8 billion across Government on sport and physical activity, but that is across the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, the Department of Health, the Department for Education, local government and so on. Surely we need to bring this together and co-ordinate it through one single, accountable body. The NHS is currently unable to pay for social prescribing and physical activity courses in the same way that it pays for pills. Surely we need to have parity between pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical interventions. Hon. Members have also mentioned schools. Physical education plays a crucial role in schools—the White Paper is very clear about that. Yet within the Ofsted measures, do we actually properly judge schools on the quality and quantity of their physical education? We do not. It is a huge opportunity that we are missing out on. Sport and physical activity can clearly play a massive role in the prevention of ill health. We know that that can save a lot of money, not just from the health budget but from welfare as a whole. We know that that is an imperative, and yet we are not grasping the opportunity. We need to recognise there are systematic, structural barriers that too often put prevention into the “too hard to do” pile, as has been said. We cannot continue to accept that. We must recognise the absolute imperative of reducing demand on health and welfare budgets through effective prevention. The only way we can do that is by committing to investment to deliver sport, physical activity and other prevention measures at true scale, while ensuring that we break down the very barriers that stop us delivering that across Government.
30 Jun 2026 · National Maternity and Neonatal Investigation · Hansard source
More
I hugely welcome the report and join in the thanks to all those who made it possible, but most fundamentally the families who shared their experiences and showed extraordinary courage through the whole process. Many of those stories were shared with us in the all-party parliamentary group on baby loss, and I assure those families that we will carry on listening to and being a voice for them through this process. The reports makes many powerful recommendations—I welcome the action plan and the maternity commissioner—but the Government must retain responsibility for the ultimate outcomes. Following the expiration of the national maternity safety ambitions in 2025, will the Secretary of State recommit to meaningful targets to reduce stillbirths and neonatal deaths and introduce a target to finally fully eliminate inequalities in baby loss?
25 Jun 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source
More
One key to creating opportunities in places like Rossendale and Darwen is reindustrialisation—making more things in more places, and creating good jobs close to home. To make this real, we need economic policy that truly understands the particular constraints facing our small towns and rural communities. We need to be connected, and to have a policy that works for all parts of the country, not just places with a mayor. That will require a truly ambitious industrial strategy that gets behind every business, and a Government fully committed to buying British. Will the Leader of the House agree to a debate in Government time on how we can make that happen?
4 Jun 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source
More
As we look forward to the Railways Bill, it is worth reminding the House that Rossendale remains the only local authority area in the north without any sort of commuter rail link, despite being only 15 miles from central Manchester. The line exists; it just needs reinstating as a commuter line. That would be a game changer for Rossendale and east Lancashire, and it is exactly the sort of project that would maximise the economic impact of Northern Powerhouse Rail, yet when Lancashire combined county authority published its transport implementation plan last month, the project was missing from the list. I find it incomprehensible. No explanation was offered. It feels like, once again, the leadership in Preston have forgotten us in Rossendale. Will the Leader of the House join me in calling on Lancashire combined county authority to think again, and agree to a debate on this specific topic?
3 Jun 2026 · Small Towns: Transport Links · Hansard source
More
Absolutely—there is rural isolation, and I will be talking about a large village in my constituency in a moment. When it comes to small towns and villages, it is a spectrum. These are communities that have been left behind for far too long, and they are the ones we now need to prioritise. The lack of buses limits access to essential services such as healthcare, education and employment, exacerbates social isolation and forces people into higher-cost alternatives.
3 Jun 2026 · Small Towns: Transport Links · Hansard source
More
My hon. Friend makes a crucial point, and I will touch on this issue. Thinking of things as a whole, not as individual, isolated projects, is crucial for the transport systems that we actually need. Rossendale has put forward its plan. Surveys show that the public overwhelming support it, because communities in Rossendale understand exactly what a rail link would mean. By opening up the valley, we could become a much more attractive destination for businesses looking to relocate to lower-cost areas. Existing businesses would have access to bigger skills pools and reduced supply costs. Jobs in central Manchester would become more viable, and footfall in our town centres would significantly grow. This is pretty much the definition of a growth no-brainer, yet like so many small-town infrastructure projects, the proposal has got nowhere. It has been consistently overlooked or rejected through a narrow use of old Green Book guidance, whereas just down the road we see multibillion-pound projects, which we cannot even connect to, being given the green light. To add insult to injury, Lancashire combined county authority did not even include the City Valley link in its recent transport infrastructure plan, despite Rossendale being clearly identified as suffering from transport isolation. I hope that is just a simple mistake, and I call on the combined authority to ensure that this vital link is included in the final version of the plan. I hope the Minister will support me in this endeavour. Similarly, I have been calling for the restoration of Lower Darwen station, which I am pleased to say is now in the implementation plan. This represents an opportunity to finally reconnect a community that has been cut off for too long. By providing easy access to the Manchester-Clitheroe line, the station would unlock new jobs and opportunities in the whole community. In both Rossendale and Lower Darwen, it is not just about a railway line; it is about finally giving our towns the infrastructure they need to thrive. Outside the south-east, our small towns have felt left behind for far too long, and persistent poor connectivity is a stark indicator of this. We need to be honest: this has not just been an accident of fate; historical Government policy and practice have been key factors. The Green Book has been consistently misused, with assessors simply relying on benefit-cost ratios, which inevitably favour better-off urban areas. Alongside that, our economic policy has defaulted to the city-focused, trickle-down approach. Although the 2024 Green Book review and Government initiatives have put us in a potentially better place, issues do remain. We need a clear focus from Ministers to ensure that civil servants are genuinely implementing the Green Book recommendations and that local authorities—particularly non-mayoral areas—have the capacity and capability to develop robust business cases. We also need to move beyond the city-centric economic model and towards one that values all places. In that regard, we have a long way to go. If we look at the list of investment programmes, infrastructure projects and policy pathfinders—
3 Jun 2026 · Small Towns: Transport Links · Hansard source
More
Thank you, Sir Roger. The lack of buses disproportionately impacts people in small towns and villages, so it is crucial that we get this right. Fundamentally, we need to recognise that buses are a public service, not a commercial enterprise. I am pleased and proud that this Government have fully recognised that right from the start. The retention of the £3 bus fare cap and investment of £1 billion a year to support bus routes will benefit thousands of my constituents. Looking forward, the Government’s commitment to empower local communities to take control of bus services, along with the requirement on local government to identify “socially necessary” routes, has the potential to deliver the joined-up services we need. But our reforms will only succeed if we address the practical barriers to delivering the day-to-day changes that our communities require. To give one example, in Edgworth near Darwen in my constituency, residents rely on healthcare, shops and schools in Bolton, yet over the years, bus services have been occasional and short-lived. This transport isolation is the single biggest issue raised with me by the community. When I spoke to a group of teenagers, they were clear that the best thing we could do to improve things for them would be simply to offer a bus into Bolton. Older residents say the same, so why have we not got one? While there is a need for a subsidy, the fundamental issue seems to be that Bolton is in Greater Manchester, so the route would cross local authority boundaries. For years, no one seemed to want to take responsibility. Greater Manchester said it could not fund the route because residents of Blackburn with Darwen would be the beneficiaries, and Blackburn was unwilling to fund it because residents were going to spend their money in Greater Manchester—not exactly a joined-up system. Things are changing, and I am pleased to say that a study commissioned by Blackburn with Darwen has finally recommended that the council get behind a new bus route. That is exactly the sort of thing that Government bus funding is supposed to enable; we just need to make it actually happen. This cross-border issue is one that we face across Rossendale and Darwen. Its impact is compounded by the fact that so many of our crucial services are in other local authority areas, and that is true of so many other small towns. Solving this is a crucial test for the implementation of bus improvement policy, and I argue that it should be incumbent on existing mayoral authorities to work proactively with neighbouring councils to eliminate cross-border transport inequity. Thirdly, I want to touch briefly on roads. Roads are an obvious and crucial connector. Many small towns are built around one or two key roads. Unlike in a city, where there are lots of options, when these roads are closed or disrupted by street works, the entire community feels it. For instance, in both Rossendale and Darwen, we have one main road that runs through the whole valley. When it is blocked or the traffic is severe, it is not just an inconvenience; it has serious impacts on local businesses and residents. Indeed, several well-established local businesses have told me they are considering leaving the area unless action is taken on congestion. Unco-ordinated, overrunning roadworks are a constraint on small towns and must be treated as such. Councils need the powers to properly police contractors and incentivise quick completion. I welcome the Government’s support for continuing the roll-out of lane rental schemes, which are proven to reduce congestion on the busiest roads. I will call on all local authorities, including Lancashire county council, to work with the Government and act with urgency to tackle this blight on our towns. Finally, we come to rail. For so many small towns this is a crucial connection, yet services are often patchy and unreliable—if they exist at all. There are still far too many towns without an accessible rail link, leaving them on the edges of opportunity, not through a lack of ambition but through a lack of connection.
3 Jun 2026 · Small Towns: Transport Links · Hansard source
More
That is a real inequity within regions now, and I will cover that in my conclusion. It is a fundamental that we have to address. We must begin with empowering people to actively travel by walking, wheeling or cycling to work or school or to see friends. True connectivity is not just about how we get from one place to another; it is about having real choice in how we do so. At present, too many people in our small towns feel that they have to rely on a car even for the shortest journeys. For many, it is not that they are unwilling to walk or ride; it is just that they do not feel they have the option. What they need is not persuasion but safe, accessible, well-designed environments to make active travel the obvious and practical choice. That means getting the basics right, from ensuring our pavements are usable for everyone—including those with disabilities or parents with prams—to safer crossings, better lighting and dedicated routes that give people the confidence to walk, wheel or cycle as part of their daily routine. Within this context I would like to focus on travel to school. We can all recognise the benefits of more children walking or riding to school on health and on reducing congestion. It is generally a more relaxed start to the day. Parents know that, but far too many concerns over safety are a key barrier: speeding heavy goods vehicles, narrow and blocked pavements and a lack of safe crossings present challenges. It is no surprise that in small towns and villages, only 30% of children walk or ride to school. For cities the figures are much higher at around 60%, showing how much room there is for improvement, and that inequity can be addressed. Living Streets, working with forward-thinking councils like Blackburn with Darwen, has shown a way forward: local authorities working proactively with schools to deliver evidence-based travel initiatives and infrastructure. But this sort of best practice is still far too patchy. Last year in Lancashire, my 11-year-old constituent William Cartwright collected 1,400 signatures for a petition asking the county council to simply install a safe crossing, to allow him and his fellow pupils to walk safely to school. Despite this clear public support, Lancashire county council said no, citing the tired old excuse that not enough people have been killed or injured—yet—on the road in question. The idea of working with the school proactively to enable safe travel seemed entirely alien to it. We need to do better. I call on the county council to think again and work with me on this, and I call on the Government to clearly lay down best practice in their road safety and active travel guidance. More broadly, active travel must be seen as integral to the wider transport system, not separate from it. Walking and cycling are what connect people to buses, trains and trams. When these modes work together, we create a system that is not only more efficient but healthier, more affordable and more sustainable for the communities it serves. I turn to buses, which are a crucial part of the transport mix that we have to get right. They are vital for the more vulnerable in our society—the elderly, the young and the disabled—yet 56% of county and unitary council areas still lack adequate provision. For small towns, a lack of buses limits access to essential services.
3 Jun 2026 · Small Towns: Transport Links · Hansard source
More
I thank everyone who has contributed. I was pleased that so many colleagues were able to cover areas that I was not able to address in my speech. I will not deal with every aspect, but it made me reflect that when we talk about growth, we sometimes default to the idea that it is just about a GDP number, but good growth has to matter and be felt in every single community. Transport is a crucial part of that. I was pleased that the hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) mentioned youth detachment, which is a fundamental indicator of how transport connectivity connects to growth opportunities and the good society we want to create where everyone feels a sense of opportunity. Although I thank the Minister for all he said and all the positive moves that are being made, I respectfully say that there is still a disconnection between what we are doing in mayoral strategic authorities and non-mayoral areas, where so much is left to whether a given non-mayoral authority has the capacity and capability to bring forward these schemes. The Government may be doing great things and bringing forward great opportunities, but if a local authority does not have the capacity, capability, or indeed desire, to grasp these opportunities on behalf of their communities, we are left behind, as in Lancashire, Shropshire, Cheshire and so many other places. We need to do more to make that connection and finally recognise that the big infrastructure projects have to impact our small towns. That requires proactivity in the project design and spending envelopes. We have £46 billion allocated for Northern Powerhouse Rail—surely some of that needs to go to connecting our small towns. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered transport links for small towns.
3 Jun 2026 · Small Towns: Transport Links · Hansard source
More
I beg to move, That this House has considered transport links for small towns. It is a pleasure, Sir Roger, to serve under your firm chairship. I thank the Minister for attending today. He has been a keen advocate for small towns, and I am sure a lot of the issues we will talk about today will be familiar to him. Connectivity is not a luxury; it is a necessity. It underpins economic growth, but it also shapes something far more immediate and personal: our health, our independence and a sense of belonging. For our small towns, the quality of connection sends a powerful message about whether we are seen, valued and included in our national story. It would be a mistake to think of this as a question simply of how towns connect to cities. It is about the everyday journeys that define people’s lives: how they get from their front door to work, to school, to the shop or to the doctor.
3 Jun 2026 · Small Towns: Transport Links · Hansard source
More
Thank you, Sir Roger. There will be an extensive section on buses—pages 75 to 300—so I am sure we will cover a lot of that sort of ground. Connectivity really matters for connecting communities. Ultimately, it is about how easily and affordably we can move through the place that we call home.
3 Jun 2026 · Small Towns: Transport Links · Hansard source
More
Absolutely, and I know that several colleagues here have been great champions of accessibility to rail links. It is absolutely fundamental. On the lack of connection, Rossendale remains the only local authority in the north without a direct rail link, despite thousands of residents commuting into Manchester every week—it is only 15 miles away. The old railway line still exists; all we need to do is reinstate it as a commuter line. Rossendale borough council has fully explored the costs and benefits in its City Valley link proposal. It is not a speculative idea, but a credible, carefully developed proposal with a strong business case behind it.
3 Jun 2026 · Small Towns: Transport Links · Hansard source
More
The hon. Lady raises a range of complex points, which the Minister will probably deal with in detail. I do not agree with her about buses, because there is plenty of local flexibility to allow that. When it comes to the Green Book, it is the misuse of the financial case—its prioritisation over the strategic case—that is the fundamental issue. The strategic case should always take priority. The investment projects that the Government have brought forward—infrastructure projects and policy pathfinders—overwhelmingly focus on mayoral strategic authorities, which are big-city-focused. That needs to change. We need to recognise the moral, economic, social and political imperative of joined-up policy that enables all our towns to reach their potential, with connectivity at the heart of that ambition. That means not just one solution but a joined-up approach, with better rail links, bus services, roads that can be relied upon and safe, reliable access routes for cycling and walking. It is not an either/or. As my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher) said, we should not see the big transport infrastructure projects in the pipeline in isolation or just as city connectors; rather, they are enablers of connectivity and growth along the whole route. In the north, we have Northern Powerhouse Rail, which is a huge opportunity for our region, but if small town connectivity is not addressed, places such as Rossendale and Darwen will feel little benefit and the opportunity will be missed. With that in mind, I ask the Minister to meet me and colleagues to discuss how to make big infrastructure projects such as Northern Powerhouse Rail a catalyst in delivering connectivity and opportunity to the small towns and communities that need it most.
1 Jun 2026 · Health Bill · Hansard source
More
I very much welcome the Bill and the modernisation it will bring. To deliver the change needed requires a fundamental redesign of NHS structures and practices. Without a willingness to make the big changes, we will never deliver on the aspirations of the NHS 10-year plan. At the same time, patients and NHS staff need to see change now. We cannot reasonably expect our residents and frontline workers to buy into this long-term vision of the NHS when they face so many issues with services right now. How will the Bill and the ongoing change process impact on some of the areas of most concern to my residents in Rossendale and Darwen? Top of the list for us is Blackburn A&E, which is one of the busiest in the country. I fully recognise the work being done by brilliant doctors and nurses to try to manage demand. None the less, the indignity of corridor care remains a blight. Almost every week I hear of patients spending hours and hours in the corridor, not knowing when they will be seen, often in discomfort, feeling exposed, anxious and unsupported. Ending that sort of experience is a crucial test for NHS modernisation. Only when we see the end of corridor care at Blackburn A&E and others will the residents of east Lancashire feel that something has really changed for the better. As we have heard, the Bill is also about improving patient safety. It includes some significant steps, but, again, what about the practicalities? For years now we have been stuck in a vicious cycle of investigating shocking cases of patient harm and system failure, making numerous recommendations to improve safety and yet failing to implement them, and repeating the same mistakes. We must break the cycle. This cannot only be about simplification; it requires bold action as well. For example, as we have heard many times in this place, we have a crisis in maternity safety and soon Baroness Amos will deliver the report on her national investigation, which is likely to identify a requirement for some really fundamental systemic and cultural change. There will also be areas outside her remit that need to be addressed, such as the role of the regulators in a fit-for-purpose patient safety landscape. I therefore wonder if the Bill goes far enough and if there will be a need for amendment after Baroness Amos reports. Perhaps the Minister will share some thoughts on that. Finally, I will touch on prevention. The move from sickness to prevention is one of the three big shifts in the NHS 10-year plan. It is surely the key to a health service that is sustainable in the long term. Although the Bill makes some reference to prevention, frankly, a lot of it feels pretty peripheral and leaves some key questions unanswered. For instance, how—in a practical sense—are we enabling ICBs to support prevention at a local level and at a scale that will make a difference? How are we driving the prevention agenda across Government Departments? Are we doing enough to ensure healthy lifestyle habits are developed in early years and at school? Why are we not putting the social prescribing of proven interventions, such as exercise programmes, on the same financial footing as pharmaceutical interventions? And so on and so on. I suspect the Committee stage will be crucial in ensuring the Bill matches its aspirations. I look forward to the Minister’s thoughts on how we can balance long-term modernisations with delivering change today.
14 May 2026 · Getting Britain Working Again · Hansard source
More
His Majesty’s Gracious Speech announced a wide range of economic measures and fully recognised the vital importance of economic security, but I think we all understand that for that security to be meaningful, it must reach into every part of our country and every community. With that in mind, I make my comments from the perspective of Rossendale and Darwen, recognising that we have much in common with many other post-industrial towns and rural areas—places characterised by small towns and villages with close-knit communities, which have too often felt ignored and left behind. This Government have consistently put growth at the heart of their agenda and have rightly identified many of the actions that we need to see. We have heard announcements on Green Book reform, £113 billion of infrastructure investment pipelines, youth job guarantees, Pathways to Work, the industrial strategy, pothole funds, Pride in Place, and many more measures, yet when I knock on doors in Rossendale and Darwen, people are still asking, “Where is the change that we were promised?” When writing this speech, I looked back at others I have made over the last two years on this subject. In those speeches, I called for more to be done to address issues that are specific to small towns like mine: a move away from the orthodoxy that favours cities and mayoral authorities, where growth is easiest to define; a procurement strategy that insists on buying British; an industrial strategy that understands small and medium-sized businesses; and policies that reward grafters, entrepreneurs and risk takers. Frankly, I could have used the same text today, because the issues remain. We have not moved nearly far enough or fast enough to meet the needs of communities like mine. Last week’s local election results show us that starkly. There has been much talk about the changes that this Government need to make. We must grasp this moment to fundamentally rethink our approach to growth strategy; incremental will just not cut it, nor will being city-centric. We cannot justify Government investment flowing into the likes of Manchester while the towns of Lancashire do not even appear in the picture. We need to learn the lessons of the last two years and do better. If we are going to deliver growth and jobs for places like Rossendale and Darwen with the urgency our electorate demands, we must commit to a scale of action that matches the challenge. That means being willing to take risks, to demand joined-up action across Government and to do the hard things on a scale that impacts every community. What does that mean in practical terms? First, on infrastructure, we have to recognise that on its own, a city-centric approach will do little for communities like mine. Consider Northern Powerhouse Rail. It is a great project that will transform connectivity between cities and major towns across the region, and it is being presented in some quarters as a transformational project for the whole north-west, but when I ask the question, “What will this do for Rossendale and Darwen or any small towns along the route?”, the answer is, “Not much.” Rossendale will remain the only local authority area in the north with no commuter rail link, despite being only 15 miles from Manchester. Darwen will continue to have a patchy and unreliable occasional service. That is why we need to change the way in which we think about such projects, and be far more ambitious in our goals—for instance by thinking in terms of growth corridors, with the requirement that these big projects bring a positive impact to every community. That would include physical infrastructure and connections for small towns as an integral part of the projects, as well as an insistence on buying locally. We need a similar approach to industrial strategy. In Rossendale and Darwen, we have many great businesses, including creative and innovative manufacturers, but none employs more than 500 people and few fall into what have been identified as national priority sectors. That is entirely typical of many places across our country, where such businesses employ the bulk of the local workforce. We need to get behind those businesses, and have a much more comprehensive and urgent industrial strategy that truly understands their challenges and opportunities. First and foremost, the strategy must embed “buy British” at its heart, using the full power of Government procurement to support our businesses. Frankly, the lack of a procurement Bill in the King’s Speech is a concern that I hope we can address. We need to bring down business costs, particularly energy, and open up access to risk-tolerant finance, and we need a tax and regulatory system that encourages employment, enterprise, risk and productivity. Alongside that, we need to restore our town centres and community spaces. Pride in Place is a great programme, and I am proud to have brought this investment to Rossendale, Rawtenstall and Darwen. That £20 million over 10 years will enable us to make significant changes, but for every town that has this support, there are many others that do not. Surely the case for investment in Bacup, Stacksteads and Whitworth is just as strong. In any case, we will enjoy the full value of this investment only if it is aligned with improvements in transport, skills and infrastructure that address the underlying constraints on our local economies. We should build on what works, and go bigger and wider with Pride in Place. We should front-load investment to increase the speed and scale of change, while ensuring that we are delivering the infrastructure that can release the full potential of places such as Rossendale and Darwen. I could list lots of other areas for action, but fundamentally, we need a change in mindset. For too long, geography has meant destiny. Small towns such as Bacup, Whitworth, Rawtenstall and Darwen have been at the back of the queue, left behind as big towns and cities shout louder and offer seemingly easy solutions. We need to break that cycle and ask, “What does this do for our towns?” That question should be embedded in every investment strategy and decision process. We must be willing to commit to strategies that insist on doing the hard things while providing the procurement policy, fiscal flexibility, regulatory framework and sustained leadership to drive delivery. We must learn the lessons of the past, and not allow established orthodoxies and a desire for easy wins to stand in the way. We simply cannot afford to fail the communities that need us most.
23 Apr 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source
More
I wish you a splendid St George’s day, Mr Speaker. My constituent Milly Mulcahy is a wheelchair user who is entirely reliant on a lift maintained by Lancashire county council to enter and leave her home. Since being installed six years ago, this lift has broken down constantly; every time it breaks down, Milly is trapped in her own home. It was completely broken for two months over Christmas, with the county council failing to respond to multiple requests. Engineers have confirmed that the lift will never work reliably and simply needs replacing, but the county council has refused to engage in a long-term solution. This flies in the face of common sense—thousands of pounds have been spent on engineer call-outs with nothing to show for it. Will the Leader of the House agree with me on calling on the Reform leadership at Lancashire county council to stop dodging the issue, do the job properly and give Milly the freedom she deserves?
20 Apr 2026 · Maternity Commissioner · Hansard source
More
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. I will make some comments as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on baby loss, but also as a bereaved parent: we lost our daughter Mallorie at the age of five days. First, I want to thank everyone who responded to the petition. It shows the massive extent of concern about this issue. So many of us share that concern as something that is personal and requires immediate and comprehensive action. For the past two years, my all-party group has been listening to families, parents and professionals. We have heard about a litany of failures across the whole sector. I am sure that colleagues will refer to many of the issues and incidents, so I will not repeat them, but we have to recognise that these systemic failures often go very deep within the culture of the health service. We need to recognise that that results in fundamental inequalities in terms of ethnicity and deprivation, with families not being listened to and suffering outcomes that are truly unacceptable. We also have to recognise that there are islands of very good practice. There are trusts and professionals who continue to do an amazing job. I can cite the birth centre at Burnley that my hon. Friend the Member for Ribble Valley (Maya Ellis) and I visited recently, where we saw how things can be done and what “good” actually looks like. There is an undeniable case for urgent and immediate action, as I think we all agree. I think we also agree that we cannot repeat the cycle of reports, reviews and recommendations. As the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) said, there have been 700 recommendations, and in many cases they were exactly the same, time after time. We cannot repeat that cycle, which is why it is so important that Baroness Amos’s maternity services investigation is different. I believe that she is entirely committed to addressing the underlying systemic issues across the sector and to bringing forward a report that focuses on the underlying systems and cultures that need to change, rather than just repeating the litany of what has gone before. Crucially, we also have the Secretary of State’s commitment to establishing a taskforce following the work of that review, to deliver on its recommendations, with an immediate overlap and focus on action. That is why I believe we have a fundamentally different opportunity, right now, to get this right. The focus on systemic changes must be accompanied by a real commitment to fixed and firm targets to reduce the harm and inequalities that we see today. Oversight and accountability will be a fundamental part of that. We recognise that we currently have an alphabet soup of organisations, with the CQC, NMC and GMC: the Care Quality Commission, the Nursing and Midwifery Council and the General Medical Council. The trusts themselves are essentially autonomous in choosing whether they follow guidelines, so introducing accountability and oversight must be a fundamental outcome of the review. I am absolutely sure that we will see clear recommendations on that point. Having a maternity commissioner is not a magic sticking-plaster that can address this fundamental, systemic problem. Let us not fool ourselves that any single measure or recommendation will solve this problem. We need to see maternity safety rebuilt from the ground up, with a culture that listens to every single family and every single mother. We need to treat them all as individuals who have their own risk factors, concerns and challenges. We need to learn from the best practice that we see across the country. When bereavements occur, we need parents to be treated with the empathy and individualisation that they require, recognising that trauma does not just affect someone in the days or weeks after birth; it can have lifelong effects. We need to rebuild the regulators, as well as all the mechanisms that hold individual trusts to account, so that they are fit for purpose. It is only when we get the foundations right—rebuilt from the ground up, with best practices embedded across the board—that a maternity commissioner might possibly be able to deliver the outcomes we want. Let us focus on listening to what Baroness Amos comes forward with, so we can deliver her recommendations and rebuild the culture from its base. Let us concentrate on listening to individual parents and families, so that we can respond to their personal risk factors. Let us make sure that we have a maternity safety system that we can all be proud of in the years to come.
24 Mar 2026 · Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood · Hansard source
More
Yes. I will touch on that in a moment. It is part of a wider picture of bereavement support and bereavement pathways nationally. From baby or infant loss to unexplained death in childhood, bereavement services are patchy and in many cases far below the standards that we need to see. We need to make that service universal. Let us move on to another cause of trauma: child death investigations. This issue is wider than SUDC but has profound impacts. Current national guidelines—the statutory guidance and joint agency guidelines—are built on historical evidence from infant deaths and have not been updated since the new pathways for genetics and cardiology were launched. That is important as it may affect inequity of care and access to these important tests. Guidelines should be updated to reflect new evidence and current pathology timeframes, and any consultation on those updates should include charities such as SUDC UK, which supports families of children up to 18 years old. From investigation to family support, NCMD data tells us that 30% of all child deaths are sudden and unexpected, and a fifth of families leave A&E with no understanding of why their child has died. While consistency has improved since the last debate, the quality of bereavement support remains deeply uneven, as the hon. Member for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart) has raised. Families affected by SUDC often experience complicated grief with severe and long-lasting consequences for parents and siblings, and this requires specialist support. The NIHR-funded Quintet project and the wider strategic partnership for sudden child death will soon provide evidence-based recommendations for supporting those families. These should be incorporated into a national plan. To conclude, what is lacking is not expertise nor compassion; rather, it is co-ordination and leadership. I am calling for a Government-led national plan for sudden unexplained death in childhood. That would turn the issues that I have raised into strategic objectives with clear timelines, milestones and measurable outcomes. It should be developed alongside families, clinicians and researchers, and report back to Parliament every two years. Such a plan would send a powerful message: these children matter, their deaths are not footnotes, and unexplained does not mean unimportant. My thanks to Brian Topping, Nikki Speed, the courageous families here today and all those who have worked tirelessly for progress and understanding. I hope that this debate can play a part in delivering that.
24 Mar 2026 · Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood · Hansard source
More
Yes, of course I agree, and I am coming on to the research. We simply owe families answers and our best efforts to find those answers. As I was saying, we know that research and awareness raising, backed up by national leadership, can make a profound difference, as it has in other areas. When priorities are clear, progress does follow. For example, research and safer sleep campaigns have significantly reduced unexplained infant deaths—known as sudden infant death syndrome, formerly cot death. About 200 babies die from SIDS each year compared with 40 older children from SUDC, yet there has been 100 times more research into SIDS than SUDC, which receives only a fraction of the attention. Peter Fleming CBE, the clinical lead for the SIDS Back to Sleep campaign and a scientific adviser to SUDC UK, has said: “Research into unexpected deaths in infancy has led to an 80% reduction in such deaths over the past 30 years in the UK. Unexpected deaths in older children are less common, much less well understood, and to date little research has been conducted in the UK to try to understand or prevent such deaths… I am convinced that with the right research we will soon be able to prevent many deaths” of older children. The families here today are not asking for guarantees—they understand that science takes time—but simply asking for this issue to be treated with the urgency it deserves.
24 Mar 2026 · Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood · Hansard source
More
I thank everyone who has contributed to this debate. I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Dr Johnson), for bringing her depth of professional experience. I also thank the Minister for her comprehensive response to the points raised. I want to reflect on a couple of the issues that were raised. First, I thank the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp) for taking me to task on describing SUDC as a cause of death. He is absolutely right: it is not; it is simply a category of the unknown. That is worth reflecting on, because it puts into context the request from my hon. Friend the Member for Altrincham and Sale West (Mr Rand) that we focus on understanding, predicting and preventing. When we combine that great unknown with that appeal to simply understand, we recognise the challenge, but also the imperative to make progress in this area. It is clear that there is an absolute consensus across both sides of the House in calling for a plan and the prioritisation of this issue. It was good to hear the Minister recognising the importance of that. Bereavement support came up several times. We have so much terminology: bereavement support, bereavement care and longer-term mental health support. The moment at which a family needs support to deal with the trauma of loss can vary greatly. It can be a day, week or year after the loss and having the right support at the right time remains absolutely vital. I very much hope and believe that it is something that the parent services and maternity safety investigation and the ongoing taskforce will grasp as a priority in their work. To reflect on some of the commitments made by the Minister, I think she has recognised that some things can be done quickly and effectively—simply getting good information about SUDC up on the website seems to be an obvious imperative that we can be acting on. However, Members have raised a range of opportunities, in particular the opportunity to build on the charity-funded research done so far and move it into Government-funded research. I would be grateful if the Minister agreed to meet with me and SUDC UK to discuss how we can take this debate forward, because as hon. Members have said, it cannot stop here. This must be the start of an ongoing process where we build understanding, take action and get real change to create a genuine legacy—a legacy for Frankie and all the families affected. Again, I finish by thanking everyone in the Public Gallery for being here. It really matters, and I am so grateful for your presence. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood.
24 Mar 2026 · Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood · Hansard source
More
I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention, which again focuses on the need for co-ordination in the effort to meet the scale of this challenge. One of the most compelling issues requiring investigation is the association between SUDC and febrile seizures. National and international data show that 30% of SUDC cases involve a history of febrile seizures—10 times higher than in the general population. Frankie Grogan had 12 seizures before he died, but he was never reviewed by a specialist. At this point, it is really important to stress that febrile seizures are very common and SUDC is rare, but the persistence of this correlation—known before the last debate—demands investigation. A national plan must accelerate understanding of the link and determine whether children who have repeated febrile seizures, or a particular subset of affected children, need different pathways of care. We must also improve public information. Information for families is inconsistent and, at times, invisible. Leaflets on febrile seizures vary significantly across NHS trusts; some fail to mention that seizures can occur during sleep or that monitoring options exist. SUDC itself—including the 60% of cases with no seizure history—is missing from the NHS website. After the 2023 debate, a token reference was added to the SIDS page, but then removed. Imagine a family receiving a post-mortem conclusion of SUDC but finding nothing when they search the NHS website. That is clearly unacceptable, but something that the Government can easily fix. There has been welcome progress in other areas. The national child mortality database is a world-leading resource. Since the previous debate, the NCMD has created SUDC-specific forms and launched pathways for genomics and cardiac screening. SUDC UK, a charity founded only in 2017, has helped to ensure that families have access to whole genome sequencing through the R441 pathway. That advocacy was born out of what Nikki Speed, chief executive of SUDC UK, describes as the “paralysing fear” that she and many families carry every day. She explained to me that for years after her loss, she got little sleep, because she was constantly having to have a hand on her surviving children to be sure they were alive and well. That fear leads families to delay trying for another child, even though a new life could be a source of hope and healing amid loss. It is completely rational for a parent to fear, if one of their seemingly healthy children has died without explanation, that their other seemingly healthy children could also be at risk. That is why genomic and cardiac screening is so important: it not only informs research but protects surviving siblings. For some families, genetic analysis has revealed risks requiring vital preventive treatment, yet those crucial tests are currently available only after the post-mortem process concludes, which brings me to the next point. Paediatric pathology is in crisis, as summarised in a recent report by the Royal College of Pathologists. Families experiencing SUDC routinely wait nine to 12 months, or sometimes longer, for a post-mortem conclusion. During that time, they live in fear—fear for their surviving children, fear of future pregnancies, fear of the unknown. Their grief is suspended and their lives are on hold. Only after that traumatic wait can they finally access genomic testing or cardiac screening to safeguard their children. After speaking with Brian and with Nikki, I would like to outline the typical timeline for a family affected by SUDC. Your child is fine. Then they die, leaving you traumatised and in shock. The child is taken away from you, and you have no control over what is happening. The ensuing process is statutory, but the response is based on evidence from infant death and so is suboptimal. After scary interactions with the police and in deep shock, you return home to deafening silence or to the child’s siblings, to whom you must tell the very worst news. Then you wait. You do not wait one week or two. You do not wait a month or even six. You most likely wait nine to 12 months. If the pathology is complex, you wait even longer. Throughout the whole wait, you are scared for your other children and scared to get pregnant again. You put your life and your grief on hold. Only then, often about a year later, do you receive the post-mortem report. You have been desperately waiting for this moment, but now it is here it brings back all the trauma of losing your child, and only now are you eligible to see whether anything hereditary is putting other family members at risk. This is inhumane. When we lost our daughter, we had the answers right away, yet the trauma is still with us. I cannot fathom what it would be like to sit in deafening silence for months, and the long-term damage that that could do. This must change. A national plan should establish faster pathways for cases in which timely information directly affects vulnerable bereaved families and child safety.
24 Mar 2026 · Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood · Hansard source
More
Precisely, and that would be to treat this issue with the importance, urgency and focus that it deserves. The very fact that most research is now charity-led is quite revealing. This research includes the Pioneer study—a population-based investigation to reduce sudden unexplained deaths in childhood—at the University of Bristol, which is beginning to analyse national mortality data and incorporate family-led research priorities. Science has advanced: genomics, cardiology, neuropathology and data science now offer real hope that the causes that were once thought unknowable may finally be within reach. However, scientific possibility alone is not enough. Findings from the UK’s Pioneer study, alongside the growing body of global evidence on SUDC, must be properly considered and applied. They should inform linked datasets and guide action by organisations such as Genomics England, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the National Institute for Health and Care Research, the Department of Health and Social Care and the NHS. The opportunity is there, but right now we rely far too much on this limited charity-funded research. If we are ever to shift the dial, as the hon. Member for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell) said, we need a national plan delivering co-ordinated, planned actions that enable and accelerate meaningful projects.
24 Mar 2026 · Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood · Hansard source
More
I beg to move, That this House has considered Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir John, and to open this important debate. Today we are discussing a category of child death that has previously been described in this room as “one of the most serious medical phenomena in our country”. —[ Official Report, 17 January 2023; Vol. 726, c. 88WH.] Sudden unexplained death in childhood is the fourth leading cause of death in children aged one to 18. Since Parliament last debated this issue in 2023, in the UK around 120 children who appeared perfectly healthy have died suddenly. That is the equivalent of four full classrooms of pre-school and school-aged children—four classrooms of lives cut short without explanation. For families, the devastation after a child dies is immediate and lifelong. What makes SUDC uniquely cruel is not only the loss, but the absence of answers. Why did those children die? I can only imagine the pain of that. When we lost our daughter Mallorie to Edwards’ syndrome, we at least had the comfort of knowing why and what was coming. We knew there was nothing more we could do. Families experiencing SUDC have none of that. It is brutal. We cannot continue to tell grieving parents, “I am sorry; we simply don’t know why your child died.” As a society we have a responsibility to do all we can to find the answers to prevent future deaths. That is why today we ask the Government to lead the search for answers through a co-ordinated national plan. First, let us be clear about what SUDC is and what it is not. Sudden unexplained death in childhood is the sudden unexpected death of a child over one year old that remains unexplained after a full investigation. Cases do not involve crime, terminal illness, diagnosed epilepsy, cardiac conditions or tragic accidents. The children appear healthy. They fall suddenly ill or go to sleep and never wake up. Parents, grandparents and siblings are left asking, “Why did this happen? Could it happen again? Is there a genetic risk? Will my other children die? Should we risk another pregnancy?” Those are questions that currently no one can answer. At the heart of today’s debate and our discussion is a little boy named Frankie Grogan. Frankie was three years old: bright, curious and full of energy with a particular love of giraffes. His family had every reason to believe that they would watch him grow and thrive. Instead, he went to sleep and did not wake up. The night before, Frankie was excited that his father would be running the Manchester 10k the next day. He briefly woke at 4.30 am asking for water. A few hours later, he was found to be still and unresponsive. Despite a thorough investigation, no cause of death could be identified. That happened in 2019 and Frankie’s family, who are here today, still do not know why. In the midst of unimaginable grief, Frankie’s grandfather, Brian Topping, came to see me. He did not ask for sympathy; he asked for structure, leadership, co-ordination and a plan. Frankie’s story reminds us that behind every statistic is a child with a name, a personality and a future that should have been. It is because of Frankie and the determination of his family that the debate is taking place today. Through SUDC UK, families, clinicians and researchers have united around the conviction that unexplained should never mean unexamined. We know that research and awareness raising, backed up by national leadership, can make a profound difference. In other areas of childhood death, when priorities are clear, progress follows.
4 Mar 2026 · Ministry of Defence · Hansard source
More
Current events are once again showing the vital importance of an agile and independent fast jet defence capability, and the UK is one of the few countries with a sovereign ability to manufacture these world-leading fast jets. The UK’s Typhoons are made in Lancashire, where over 20,000 jobs are reliant on maintaining that production. However, right now, assembly facilities lie empty. Last year, the Government secured a very important £8 billion deal with Turkey, which gives temporary protection for those jobs and will restart assembly, but the job is absolutely not done. We now need to look at how we take the next step and secure our production base and competitive position for the next decade and more. This is all about the UK committing to its own order of Typhoon jets, which is what we need to ensure our world-leading position and keep the skills and experience that were so crucial in securing the Turkey deal and will be crucial for other, future deals. A UK order means that the maximum value is retained here, with sections made at Samlesbury and full assembly at Warton. The UK ordering the latest Typhoon also indicates full confidence in the jet and allows us to stockpile, making further sales to other countries more likely. In any case, we need more fast jets. We had 137 Typhoons, but the 30 original tranche 1s are already being withdrawn from service and will be retired by 2027. This will leave 107 tranche 2 and 3 fighters, which are also ageing and are due for retirement in 2040, and lack the range of capabilities that can be delivered in the latest tranche 5 version. We can all get excited about the long-term potential of the global combat air programme, but it will be the late 2030s before those jets ever enter into service, leaving a capability gap. Part of that gap is being addressed by the purchase of the F-35s. These are exceptional aircraft, but they are a very different beast from the Typhoon. The F-35 is primarily a stealthy, ground-attack, precision-strike aircraft able to penetrate heavily defended airspace; the Typhoon is an air dominance fighter, with higher top speed, faster acceleration, better climb rate and superior sustained turn performance. It is also compatible with the full range of British-made missiles, such as the Meteor and the Spear 3, whereas the F-35 currently is not.
4 Mar 2026 · Ministry of Defence · Hansard source
More
Precisely, and of course the upgrade in the radar systems gives it the very latest capability to suppress at a distance. The Typhoon is a powerful beast and works so well within a blended capability, alongside F-35s and other craft. Other European countries have voted for their domestic production bases by ordering their own Typhoons. Spain, Italy and Germany have all done so; only the UK is left out. Of course, there is a wider perspective. Lancashire is home to world-class defence industries, which every growth plan in Lancashire has at its heart. The fact that I can go into schools in places such as Bacup, Whitworth and Darwen and talk about some of the best engineering and technical jobs in the world being just down the road is so vital for aspiration. The apprenticeships and career opportunities at not just BAE, but the many innovative companies in the supply chain, show that the north-west is the best place for anyone who wants to be at the cutting edge of the manufacturing industries of the future. We should not be happy with merely sustaining this jewel in the crown; rather, we should be seeking to strengthen and continually build skills, scale and competitive advantage. Turkey chose to order Typhoons from us because the experience and skills of workers at Samlesbury and Warton cannot be matched. We now have the opportunity to build on this and give the ultimate vote of confidence by ordering UK fighters that will maintain our balanced and multi-functional fast jet capability for this decade and beyond. Frankly, it feels like a no-brainer, and I hope the defence investment plan will reflect this.
3 Mar 2026 · Spring Forecast · Hansard source
More
The stability the Chancellor has brought back to our economy has allowed us to allocate record levels of infrastructure investment. Alongside the Green Book review, this creates the conditions for meaningful investment in previously left-behind places like Lancashire. Yet, as the review highlights, places like Lancashire that do not yet have a mayor can lack the capacity and capability to bring forward fully investable business cases. In recent months, myself, Lancashire colleagues and leaders of Lancashire combined authority have written to the Government asking for interim capacity funding to develop fully investable proposals. The need is urgent, so will the Chancellor meet me and colleagues to discuss how we can bring forward the game-changing growth projects that Lancashire needs?
5 Feb 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source
More
Ever since Australia banned social media for under-16s, my office has been inundated by appeals from parents for action here in the UK. They see the very real risks of a social media wild west; they fear for their children and want to say no, and are simply asking for the Government to have their backs. As a parent of an eight-year-old, I share their fear. I am pleased that the Government have launched a consultation and I look forward to hosting listening sessions across Rossendale and Darwen. This is a complex issue; there is much to be considered. We have to get this right. Would the Leader of the House agree to an early debate in Government time to allow Members to fully explore how we best meet this generational challenge?
5 Feb 2026 · Road Safety · Hansard source
More
In my constituency, road safety is now the No. 1 issue raised with the police. Just in the last year we have seen fatalities, injuries and countless near misses across Rossendale and Darwen. My inbox is filled with emails from people telling me that the roads just do not feel safe, which is why I warmly welcome the Government’s road safety strategy, and we now must turn its ambition into reality. Let me begin with delivery. Road safety is, by necessity, delivered locally. Road safety partnerships are theoretically the main forum for this, bringing together councils, police forces and other services. Some partnerships, such as the one in Warwickshire, have shown the success that this model can bring; chaired by the PCC, they have the political backing to deliver the change we need. However, in too many parts of the country these partnerships are without that buy-in, with councils and police forces siloed and unwilling to meaningfully share resources. That is very much the picture in Lancashire, with the result being an underfunded and reactive approach to road safety that relies on outdated processes and fails to listen to our communities. To give one example, William Cartwright, an 11-year-old boy in my constituency, did not feel safe crossing a very busy road on his way to school and launched a petition asking for a zebra crossing to be built, which gained over 1,400 signatures. Despite the mass of evidence showing that the community did not deem the road safe, the Reform leadership at the county council rejected the proposal because they said too few people had been killed or seriously injured there to merit an intervention.
5 Feb 2026 · Road Safety · Hansard source
More
Absolutely; I welcome my hon. Friend’s intervention. It is outdated guidance, and it is used as an excuse to avoid taking the action that people need to see. It does not have to be this way. Neighbouring authorities—we have heard about the example of West Yorkshire—proactively listen to schools and their communities. That community-led approach must become our baseline, because listening to communities is vital. Partnerships also need resources to deliver the change we need; too often they are constrained by low levels of funding. Allowing councils to retain the fees from road offence fixed penalties, which in some cases raise millions of pounds each year, would make a real difference if ringfenced locally. Nationally, we must be strategic and dynamic with our interventions, aiming for the greatest impact by focusing on higher-risk groups. An empowered road safety board and the new road safety investigation branch could be vital in keeping policy responsive. It would be good to hear from the Minister when the board will be established, what its powers will be and whether she expects it to meet more regularly than once a year. With speeding being a key factor in 56% of all fatal collisions, this is an area where targeted action is essential. The Minister has committed to update the guidance on speed limits and enforcement, and the need for that is urgent. Just last week I was with residents on a road notorious for speeding, looking at three wrecked cars on the spot where a fatality occurred last year. Everyone knew it was only a matter of time before we saw another crash. They had spent the year calling for speed cameras, yet nothing was done. The message here is clear: communities know where the risks are, and we need to listen. That is why last month I launched a road safety campaign in Rossendale and Darwen, calling on Lancashire to adopt a new road safety approach that properly resources our road safety partnership and acts to identify and address high-risk roads before incidents occur. Our survey has already had hundreds of responses, and this coming weekend I am hosting roundtables across the constituency to bring together residents, councillors and police to identify the high-risk areas and discuss how we can make them safer. I really hope that Lancashire county council will now listen to residents and work with me to deliver safer roads and save lives. To conclude, we must end the road safety postcode lottery. Strong national leadership that sets clear expectations will be essential in supporting delivery for every community. That needs to be complemented by steps to genuinely resource delivery on the ground. If we can get this right, the road safety strategy and the lives it saves will be a legacy of which we can all be proud.
27 Jan 2026 · Business Rates · Hansard source
More
I thank the Minister for his positive engagement and his willingness to listen. It has made a big difference. His announcement will be a big relief to pubs throughout my constituency, and it shows that the Government are on their side. However, he has rightly recognised the need for more fundamental reform, so I welcome the announcement of the pub and hotel valuation methodology reviews and the high street strategy. Does he agree that this is an opportunity to think further about how the business rates system, and indeed the tax system as a whole, could be used to actively incentivise entrepreneurs to start and grow businesses and create jobs in the places where our communities need them most?
14 Jan 2026 · Horse and Rider Road Safety · Hansard source
More
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Dowd. In the interests of time, I shall ditch what I assure you would have been a fascinating speech and reflect on just a couple of areas. I congratulate the hon. Member for Newbury (Mr Dillon) on securing this debate. I very much agree with and support the points he made. However, I slightly challenge the idea that because the road safety strategy does not mention horse riding specifically and repeatedly, it is not truly covered. The strategy is based on a safe system approach that recognises that all users are vulnerable, that human error is inevitable but deaths and serious injuries are not, and that the road and vehicle environment should be designed to protect all users as much as possible. In covering safe roads, roadsides, road users, speeds, vehicles and post-crash response, it is truly comprehensive. In that regard, it offers a huge number of opportunities to directly impact the safety of horse riders, such as opportunities for education, enforcement, better street design and technology that protects vulnerable road users from human error. I think the strategy is truly comprehensive and can address many of the areas that have been identified without necessarily needing to identify horse riders specifically. Members have mentioned that the strategy recognises that more needs to be done to deliver on the intent of the 2022 highway code and its hierarchy of road users, in order to recognise the vulnerability of some of those users. Will the Minister reflect on what more can be done to deliver on that intent? Finally, I recognise that safe physical infrastructure and, ideally, getting horses off the road and on to good bridleways or greenways can make a massive difference. What more can be done to ensure that local authorities genuinely have the funding to deliver the safe infrastructure for which local partnerships, including users —horse riders and others—regularly identify a need?
8 Jan 2026 · Road Safety Strategy · Hansard source
More
I thank the Minister for her statement and her great personal commitment to this vital issue. It is clear that the Government have listened to families and the road safety community and followed the evidence. She rightly recognises the importance of local partnerships in delivering on the ambitions of the strategy. Unfortunately, in Lancashire the Reform-led county council insists on waiting for fatalities and serious injuries to occur before acting, seemingly regardless of concerns raised by residents. Does the Minister agree that to deliver on this strategy and save lives, local authorities such as Lancashire must have a more proactive approach by listening to communities, identifying risk areas and acting before people are killed or injured?
8 Jan 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source
More
A happy new year to you, Mr Speaker. In this new year, I am looking forward to seeing how the policies that this Government have delivered in their first 18 months have a real impact on the day-to-day lives of people in Rossendale and Darwen. Despite much-needed investment, including from the Pride in Place programme, Rossendale remains the only borough in the north with no commuter rail link. The fragmented nature of Lancashire politics has held that back for years, but the local government reorganisation that this Government are delivering now finally gives us the chance to give this project a fresh start. Will the Leader of the House agree to a debate in Government time on how devolution can enable projects, such as the Rawtenstall rail link, to deliver vital transport to local areas?
18 Dec 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source
More
A very merry Christmas to you, Mr Speaker, and to all House staff and colleagues. Since we were elected, my Lancashire colleagues and I have been campaigning for more funding for our local services. When new local government funding was announced yesterday, I was really pleased to see that the Government have properly listened. Funding is now following need, and a decade of austerity is ending. It is great to see Blackburn with Darwen borough council and Rossendale borough council getting significant increases. We are working with council leaders to ensure that the impacts of that funding are felt in every community. However, most key services in Rossendale are delivered by Lancashire county council. They have been under threat since Reform took control, with cuts to nurseries, gritting and care homes all being considered. Now, thanks to the Government and to lobbying by Labour MPs across Lancashire, the county council will get a massive increase—£310 million more—by 2028, so Reform has no more excuses. Will the Leader of the House join me in calling on Reform to stop the cuts and focus instead on delivering the services that we all rely on?
16 Dec 2025 · Grassroots Cricket Clubs · Hansard source
More
I remember that great series of 2005 where we all saw the Ashes on Channel 4 playing out with great drama. It was amazing. There is no doubt that access to those moments on terrestrial TV is massively important. Through the all-party parliamentary group for cricket, my hon. Friend the Member for Welwyn Hatfield has been convening many meetings around this issue, with broadcasters. There are subtleties to it, but the fundamental is that people need to be able to see their heroes. That is one of the great things about the Lancashire league. People could go down and see Viv Richards or Everton Weekes playing. Past generations have stories about seeing these players in the flesh—it was massively inspiring. Modern formats like the Hundred play a real role here. The number of kids in the audiences there is really inspiring. Darwen are relative newcomers to the Lancashire league, only joining in 2017, but were champions in 2022. The club has gone from strength to strength in recent years, under the brilliant leadership of chair Chris Lowe. It has drawn in money through partnerships with Blackburn with Darwen council, the Aldridge trust and the ECB. It has invested in a brilliant new club house and, more recently, a cricket dome, one of only two currently in the country, and a brilliant indoor facility for kids. I was involved in opening it recently. It is a truly inspiring sight and it is so important that we have these year-round facilities in places like Lancashire, because kids want to play all year. That is one of the great risks in our patch: we have these wonderful summer programmes—All Stars and Dynamos—and yet the spark can be so easily lost during the winter. Innovations like cricket domes are brilliant value for money. The Darwen club has already established a partnership with 13 local schools, which gives them a conduit into the game all year round. These are clubs with all sorts of different histories, but what they have in common is brilliant youth programmes engaging kids and great community facilities. At Bacup, where my son was involved in the All Stars, we have brilliant, inspiring trainers—Terry, Lawrence, Ben and Sam. On a Sunday morning in the summer, the sight of all the groups across the pitch is wonderful and inspiring. Indeed, the sausage sandwiches in the clubhouse afterwards are equally inspiring in their own way. As I said, all these clubs have great facilities, which have become the heart of their communities. The first birthday party I went to at my kid’s school was in the cricket clubhouse. We have our town board meetings in Darwen clubhouse. We have so many major, vital community events in these community sports facilities; they are so important to us. The other thing these clubs have in common is that they could do so much more for our communities, which brings us to the funding question. Some great stuff has been done with grassroots funding over the years, but, as all colleagues have said, it has a fragile status. I think we all recognise that there is perhaps a disconnect between the investment we put into sport and the great value of sport across society in terms of health, wellbeing and economic outcomes. One question I am sure the Minister will want to reflect on is the extent to which our investment matches the huge benefits that sport can bring to our communities. In that regard, I associate myself with the remarks made by my hon. Friend the Member for Welwyn Hatfield about Sport England and its role as a statutory consultee. To get the benefits, we have to have the facilities retained in our communities. We have to protect them, and Sport England plays a vital role there. I cannot remember the exact stat, but it only objected to something like 3%—a tiny number—of the applications that it was consulted on. It is not a barrier, but it brings much value and vital expertise into the mix. I will finish with one final reflection on funding, from the point of view of someone who lives in a small town and whose cricket clubs are in small towns. The role of sports clubs in small towns and villages is disproportionate to that of those in big towns and cities. They are vital, so I ask the Minister to consider how our funding approaches and prioritisation might reflect the value that those clubs—not just cricket clubs, but football clubs, rugby clubs and so on—have to our small towns. They are the heart of our communities and we must retain them.
16 Dec 2025 · Grassroots Cricket Clubs · Hansard source
More
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Welwyn Hatfield (Andrew Lewin) for securing this debate. It gives me a chance to wax on about surely the greatest cricket league in the country—the historic Lancashire league, of which my constituency of Rossendale and Darwen has been at the heart throughout. Three of the founding 14 members—Haslingden, Rawtenstall and Bacup—were there right from the start. Haslingden is just outside of my constituency, unfortunately. It was the first club, formed in 1853. Rawtenstall and Bacup have proud histories. Bacup has been at Lanehead Lane since 1860—160 years at the same cricket ground—and I think it is England’s highest sporting ground. Clearly, weather plays a factor. Rawtenstall has been at Bacup Road since 1886. These clubs are steeped in history. Perhaps their greatest moment, which epitomises the nature of Rawtenstall and Bacup’s rivalry, was the championship title game of 1922. Both teams were tied at the top of the league and had to play a play-off in Haslingden in front of 5,000 spectators. They got as far as the fourth innings and fell out over the playing conditions. For the next five days, the teams turned up on alternate days, until the match was finally abandoned and they shared the title. That rivalry continues to this day. One of the great factors of the Lancashire league is the international professionals that we welcome. There are too many to list. Rawtenstall had Sydney Barnes for three years—one of the true greats. Bacup had Everton Weekes, at the height of his powers. In the year he was named Wisden Cricketer of the Year, he was playing at Bacup. It is absolutely remarkable. When I moved to Bacup back in the 2000s, I was stunned to find that Chris Cairns was the professional. He was a great New Zealand all-rounder. These places have deep histories.
4 Dec 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source
More
This week, residents in Rossendale have once again experienced massive disruption and delays due to roadworks. This time it was emergency works by United Utilities, where necessary four-way lights were not being operated according to the permit. My office has been working with Lancashire county council to get promises of action, but as of this morning there has been no change. My residents are rightly fed up with this happening time and again. Since being elected, I have called on the county council to properly enforce street works and to introduce a lane rental scheme, which could address congestion on our busiest roads. I am once again calling on the Reform council leadership to take urgent action. To shine a light on the issue, will the Leader of the House agree to a debate in Government time on the issue of street works?
2 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source
More
Our fiscal framework is not working. This is the structure that is supposed to manage compliance with our fiscal rules and deliver stability and confidence, yet we are seeing quite the opposite. Our current framework is leading to speculation, policy volatility and short-termism, so is there a better way? The fundamental problem with the current framework is that it requires the OBR to make binary pass-fail judgments on whether the rules are being met, using highly uncertain forecasts of what the economy might look like in 2029. To compound that, the OBR is allowed to count only the impacts of policies that have a high degree of certainty and evidence. That means that for anything new and innovative, it is likely that only the costs, not the benefits, will be included. On the one hand, we have the requirement for a binary pass-fail judgment; on the other hand, we have massive uncertainty and significant exclusions within the forecast. How are those compatible? The honest truth is that they are not, but that is what the rules currently require, so focus turns to the midpoint of a probability range, which is called a central point estimate. It has no economic meaning beyond being the midpoint. The OBR openly acknowledges that the number has “essentially no chance of being the actual outcome”, yet it is used as if it is the forecast, giving rise to statements such as, “The Chancellor has £9.9 billion of headroom.” Taken at face value, such statements fundamentally misrepresent the inherent uncertainty. The forced pass-fail system and excessive focus on point estimates has real-world consequences. For a start, binary judgments risk binary responses. A marginal fail is seen as a crisis requiring immediate action, whereas a marginal pass is taken to imply that everything is fine. Given the massive uncertainties in the forecast, the reality is that there is actually no difference between the two situations. Overall, this pressure for lurches between crisis and complacency, driving policy recalibrations in response to binary judgments or changes to forecast methodology, is simply not conducive to policy stability. There is also a damaging effect on policy design. A pass-fail mindset inevitably incentivises funding policies that deliver easily quantified impacts within the forecast timescale while discouraging longer-term, less quantifiable ones. That is especially problematic for the kind of policies we really need the most—those that prevent ill health, reduce worklessness and manage long-term liabilities. It is essential to address all those areas if we want to bring down debt over the long term. All that inevitably dampens investment and is bad for growth, and speculation and policy volatility are hardly good for bond rates either. Is there a better way? Many economists and institutions believe so. We need to recognise the really important step that the Chancellor took in this Budget; moving to a single formal assessment each year reduces speculation and policy volatility. That is a significant step and, as it will require the charter for Budget responsibility to be amended, it opens the possibility of further positive change. One such change is that from 2027, the charter introduces a tolerance range for the borrowing rule of plus or minus 0.5% of GDP. That is a big improvement, but there is a strong argument for bringing it forward to 2026 and considering a range for the debt rule too. We could go further. The Institute for Fiscal Studies is exploring a traffic-light approach based around compliance with a wide range of Budget policy objectives. Thinking about longer-term risk management, we could do a lot more to capture the long-term costs of inaction and show how we are offsetting future risk and bringing down long-term debt projections. Proposals have also been made about reforming the OBR’s overall remit and methodology, along with revising the role of the Treasury, which rightly poses fundamental questions about the best tools for judging compliance. Our fiscal rules are vital. Maintaining fiscal discipline is an inherent part of delivering a virtuous cycle of investment, growth and renewal, but there is broad agreement that our fiscal framework, with its reliance on highly uncertain forecasts and pass-fail requirements, is leading to speculation, policy volatility and short-termism. We all pay for that through higher borrowing costs and depressed growth. It is clear that there is a better way that could provide greater stability and enable us to meet fiscal rules and build headroom, while incentivising long-term growth and demand reduction policies. That is what we should strive for, and the time to make it happen is now.
20 Nov 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source
More
It is national Road Safety Week and soon the Government will unveil their much-anticipated road safety strategy. In my constituency, road safety is now the issue that is raised most often with me and our neighbourhood police, but when we raise these concerns with the Reform leadership at Lancashire county council, they consistently refuse to take action. The Reform policy is to wait for accidents to take place, stating that there need to be at least 10 collisions, of which 20% must have killed or seriously injured, before action is taken. This flies in the face of common sense and is an insult to our residents, who see close calls and near misses every day. We must listen to our communities. I have been calling on the leadership of Lancashire county council to work with me, but so far they have refused even to meet. Road safety should be above local politics, so will the Leader of the House agree to a debate in Government time on this important matter?
12 Nov 2025 · Typhoon Fighter Sovereign Capability · Hansard source
More
The hon. Gentleman is reaching levels of technicality that I do not fully understand, but I think the fundamental point is that we should strike a balance and try to get the best of both. The Typhoon is a platform that can deliver capabilities that we very much need. As has been pointed out, other Eurofighter partner countries have taken exactly that decision. In December 2024, Spain ordered an additional 25 Typhoons. At the same time, Italy ordered 25 to replace its tranche 1s. Last month, Germany placed an order for another 20 Typhoons, taking its total order pipeline to 58. Those countries have protected their domestic fast jet manufacturing capability while ensuring that they have a mix of capabilities to address the full range of conflict scenarios that, sadly, we can look forward to.
12 Nov 2025 · Typhoon Fighter Sovereign Capability · Hansard source
More
It is truly a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Christopher. I congratulate the hon. Member for Fylde (Mr Snowden), a fellow Lancashire MP, on the passion with which he spoke. I associate myself with all the remarks that have been made, and will be made, in welcoming the Turkey deal. As has been said, it was a massive boost for workers at Samlesbury and Warton, and has been received with great enthusiasm. My hon. Friend the Member for South Ribble (Mr Foster), the hon. Member for Fylde and I have long been calling for it, and it comes on the back of huge amounts of hard work from Ministers and civil servants in the Department. We must not underestimate the massive impact that the order will have, but it is not job done; we now need to look at how we can kick on. As has been highlighted, it is imperative that we secure the sovereign capability, production base and competitive position for the next decade and more. We need to finish the job. I have come to the conclusion that the only way of doing so is through a UK Typhoon order. That is what we need to maintain our world-leading position, the skills and the expertise that were so crucial in securing the Turkey deal. The decision was not taken by the previous Government and it now falls to this one. A UK order would mean that maximum value is retained here. We will hear all the arguments about the sections being made at Samlesbury for assembly at Warton. I agree with the argument that a UK order would also build confidence in the quality and longevity of the aircraft, which would bolster our ability to secure future international orders. In any case, the fundamental point, as has been highlighted, is that we need more new fast jets. We had 137 Typhoons. Thirty tranche 1 aircraft will be retired by 2027, and that leaves 107 tranche 2 and tranche 3 fighters, which are ageing and will be retired by 2040. Despite upgrades, they do not have the full range of capabilities that could be delivered with the latest tranche 5. For sure, we all get very excited by the potential of the Tempest global combat air programme, but it will be, at best, the late 2030s before it comes online. As has been said, it is not a direct replacement or comparator for the Typhoon, so we have a clear capability gap to fill somehow. Part of that is being addressed by the purchase of the F-35, which creates an opportunity. Although the F-35 is a brilliant aircraft, it is, as has been pointed out, a very different aircraft from the Typhoon, with different design philosophy and different capabilities. That creates an opportunity for a blended Air Force. The F-35 is primarily a stealthy, ground-attack, precision strike aircraft able to penetrate heavily defended areas. The Typhoon is an air dominance fighter with a higher top speed, faster acceleration, better climb rate and superior sustained turn performance. The Typhoon is also compatible with a full range of British-made missiles such as the Meteor and Spear 3, whereas the F-35 currently is not. There is an opportunity for a blend there. We do not need to choose one or the other; we can bring the capabilities together to create an Air Force truly fit for the 2030s and onwards.
12 Nov 2025 · Typhoon Fighter Sovereign Capability · Hansard source
More
The right hon. Gentleman makes a reasonable point. I would not use the same sort of pejorative language, but a recent National Audit Office report highlighted exactly those integration issues and, as I have pointed out, the Meteor and Spear 3 are not currently compatible with the F-35. There is no doubt that sovereign capability means maintaining all the controls to deliver the independence and resilience that a tier 1 nation surely requires in its defence strategies. I will briefly take a wider perspective. Lancashire is home to world-class defence industries, as we all know. Every single growth plan that talks about Lancashire’s future has those at its heart. The fact that we can go into schools in places like Bacup, Whitworth and Darwen and talk about some of the best engineering and technical jobs in the world being just down the road is invaluable to building aspiration in places that need it most. The apprenticeships and career opportunities at not just at BAE, but the many innovative companies in the supply chain, mean that Lancashire and the north-west is the best place for anyone who wants to work in the cutting-edge manufacturing industries of the future. Surely we should not be happy with merely sustaining that jewel in the crown. Rather, we should seek to strengthen and continually build skills, scale and competitive advantage. Turkey chose to order the Typhoon because the experience, quality and skills of workers at Samlesbury and Warton cannot be matched. We have the opportunity to build on that and give the ultimate vote of confidence by ordering UK fighters that will maintain our balanced and multifunctional fast jet capability through the next decade and more. I hope that the defence procurement strategy delivers just that.
4 Nov 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source
More
T4. Will the Chancellor please update the House on progress made with the implementation of the Green Book review and that change, as a result, might better enable investment in small northern towns such as those that make up Rossendale and Darwen?
30 Oct 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source
More
Reform-led Lancashire county council proposes to close a gritting depot that serves my borough of Rossendale, which could cause absolute chaos this winter. That is just one of many cuts that Reform is considering, with nurseries and care homes already in the firing line. Will the Leader of the House join me in calling on Lancashire county council to listen to our communities and stop cutting the services that we rely on?
13 Oct 2025 · Baby Loss · Hansard source
More
I beg to move, That this House has considered baby loss. I am deeply privileged to be opening this debate in the middle of national Baby Loss Awareness Week, and in advance of the international “wave of light” on Wednesday. I want to start by welcoming the bereaved families who have joined us in the Galleries, and particularly for doing so at such a late hour: they have shown fantastic stamina in sitting through some fascinating business. I know that a number are also watching online. I have no doubt this will, for many of us, be an emotive debate that will bring back many memories, so I say this to those in the Galleries: I am grateful for your courage in joining us, and your presence lifts this whole debate and this whole day. I know that for many of you, your story is one of being let down by the system. While today cannot undo that, I hope that this national spotlight on what you have experienced, and our shared commitment to fundamental change, will be of some comfort. I also thank everyone in the Chamber for their attendance today, and for the cross-party support that the debate has received. This is a personal topic for me and for my family. Our daughter Mallorie was born in 2015 with Edwards’ syndrome, a condition that we were told was not compatible with life; yet she lived for five days, and died in my arms. Those days were both the hardest of our lives and the time that we value most. We spent those days in the butterfly suite, a bereavement room funded by the local baby loss charity Friends of Serenity. Throughout that time, we received amazing support from the maternity team at Burnley hospital. I want to take this opportunity to thank, once again, all the team at Burnley, and to recognise the amazing work that baby loss charities do throughout the UK. The years since Mallorie’s death have been challenging. The impacts of losing a child do not end after a week or a month or a year; they stay with us. My wife, Vanessa, suffered depression and post-traumatic stress disorder following Mallorie’s death, and has never been able to fully recover and return to her work as a health visitor. For 10 years she has had consistent difficulties in accessing sustained specialist mental health support, instead being bounced between short-term interventions and generalists. Her NHS career has now been terminated on grounds of ill health, and she is back on a five-month waiting list for therapy. Yet we count ourselves among the lucky ones. We had as good a hospital experience as we could have had in the circumstances, and time to prepare for what we knew was an inevitable outcome. We did not leave feeling that more could have been done, or that we had been let down; we felt listened to and supported in the weeks that followed. Sadly, however, as we will hear today, far, far too many families have had the very opposite of that experience. We will hear heartbreaking accounts of babies who should not have died, of families’ concerns being belittled and ignored, of practices that fall well below any acceptable standard, and of institutional cultures of denial and cover-up. I believe that as we reach the end of today’s debate, no one will be in any doubt that addressing the long-term systemic failings in maternity care once and for all must be an imperative for this Government. Let me start by detailing the extent of this challenge. Tragically, 13 babies die shortly before, during or soon after birth every day. Every day, 13 mothers know the immense grief of losing a child they were expecting to welcome into their lives. In 2023, there were 4,478 baby deaths in total. Some 1,933 of these were neonatal deaths, while 2,545 were stillbirths, with the cause of one third of those stillbirths still unknown. More broadly, ectopic pregnancy affects one in 80, while 240 infants die every year from sudden unexplained death syndrome, and evidence suggests that one in six pregnancies in the UK ends in miscarriage. Crucially, these family tragedies are not shared equally throughout society; ethnic minorities and those living in deprivation are far more likely to experience this loss. This has been known for 70 years, yet little action has been taken to address it. Even in 2023, black babies were over twice as likely to be stillborn compared with white babies, while neonatal mortality rates among black and Asian babies were over one and a half times higher than the rate among white babies. Similarly, babies born to mothers living in the most deprived areas are twice as likely to die shortly after birth than those in the least deprived areas. This profound inequality must be rooted out. These deaths occur amid a pattern of poor culture and practice in too many of our maternity wards and trusts. In its 2022 to 2024 review, the Care Quality Commission found that only 35% of maternity units were rated as “good” for safety. No units were found to be “outstanding”, and 65% were rated “inadequate” or “requires improvement”. Behind these figures lies a litany of family tragedy. In response, there has been no shortage of inquiries. Over the last 10 years, we have seen reviews or investigations into care in East Kent, Morecambe Bay, and Shrewsbury and Telford, as well as the ongoing review in Nottingham. These have revealed much and made many recommendations, yet change has not come and the cycle of failure has continued. It is in this context that the Government have rightly decided to launch a national investigation—a systematic and urgent national review of maternity services. This is an opportunity that we must grasp, and we have a Secretary of State who I believe truly understands the urgency and importance of making it count. We have the investigation being led by a chair of the highest reputation, we have a commitment to a taskforce to deliver on recommendations, and we have many colleagues in this place who are determined to make sure that the voices of families are heard and acted on. We must get this right, so before I hand over to colleagues, I would like to make four key asks. First, the investigation must provide clear and binding steps to achieve national change in maternity care, particularly to tackle the inequality of outcomes that is dependent on the race or wealth of the mother. To this end, the investigation must set out clear, consistent approaches to safety across all maternity units in England, which means unequivocally defining “safety”—amazingly, there is no shared definition of “safety” across maternity services. The inquiry must identify the reasons why past recommendations have not been implemented or resulted in change. It must be willing to address any embedded cultural, structural or governance factors that undermine quality, safety and accountability. When the investigation reports and the taskforce releases its action plan, the Government must fully resource the delivery and ensure there is robust monitoring and real accountability. Secondly, it is crucial that the Government set new national maternity safety ambitions. In 2015, the then Government announced ambitions to halve relative rates of stillbirth, neonatal deaths, maternal deaths and brain injuries by 2025. Alongside that, they also announced an ambition to reduce preterm births from 8% to 6%. Those ambitions are due to expire and, in any case, were never on track to being met. It is a stark reminder of how important this issue is that 2,500 fewer babies would have died if the targets had been reached. The UK’s baby death rate is still considerably worse than those of the best-performing countries in Europe. To match those countries, Sands and Tommy’s have proposed new ambitions, with an end date of 2035 to align with the NHS 10-year plan. I apologise for the list, but they include a stillbirth rate of two per 1,000 total births; a neonatal mortality rate of 0.5 per 1,000 live births for babies born at 24 weeks’ gestation and over; a preterm birth rate of 6%, with disaggregated data for iatrogenic and spontaneous preterm births; and eliminating inequalities in these outcomes based on ethnicity and deprivation. The Government’s commitment to close the black and Asian maternal mortality gap is welcome, but it must explicitly include closing the black and Asian stillbirth and neonatal mortality gaps. Establishing routine data collection on miscarriages should be prioritised. Once that is established, an ambition to reduce the miscarriage rate should be added. I urge the Government to be ambitious, and to implement these new targets, which will help to guide and inform the improvements that will be made in services in the years to come. Thirdly, we must urgently improve bereavement care for parents in hospitals and the mental health support they receive after discharge. Losing a child is devastating, and compassionate care, both immediately and in the long term, is vital to processing grief. The national bereavement care pathway aims to standardise bereavement care, and states that this should be given by trained staff, with dedicated grieving spaces provided, opportunities for parents to have meaningful moments with their baby offered and referrals for further support made. Since its 2017 launch, NHS trusts have gradually adopted the pathway, with full coverage achieved in 2024. However, voluntary uptake and a lack of ringfenced funding have led to highly inconsistent implementation, and sometimes it is entirely lacking. A bereaved mother described the hospital support she received as: “Terrible. No aftercare whatsoever. I felt abandoned. My mental health spiralled due to lack of support and not knowing where to get help… I left that hospital with a broken heart.” Bereavement support must continue post discharge. I have described the challenges that my wife Vanessa has faced in accessing specialist support, and she is by no means alone. Sands’ 2025 report found that over 80% of bereaved parents needed specialist psychological support post discharge, yet despite the introduction of NHS maternal mental health services in England, only 17% of bereaved parents were actually able to access it. We must also recognise the additional barriers that fathers and partners face in accessing support. Only 29% of services offered basic assessments to fathers in 2024, and those are often quite perfunctory. One father explained how he was assessed and recommended for psychological interventions and a referral to a clinic, yet the only support he actually received was a leaflet outlining local self-help groups. It is not good enough, and services must recognise that fathers and partners also grieve. So I urge the Government to issue clear standards and national guidance for commissioning specialist mental health support services for bereaved parents, including fathers and partners. Support must also be given to healthcare professionals, who can themselves be impacted by baby deaths. Training remains inaccessible for many healthcare professionals, and staff often lack the time to attend sessions. Bereavement care training must be available during work hours, and overall we must ensure staff are equipped to support grieving families and to look after themselves. Finally, I want to touch briefly on the role of regulators, most notably the Nursing and Midwifery Council. In an area as critical as maternity safety, an effective and accountable regulator is a crucial component, yet issues with the NMC are long term and well documented. As was noted in relation to the 2024 culture review of the organisation: “Good nurses are finding themselves being investigated for years over minor issues and bad nurses are escaping sanction because of a system that’s not functioning as well as it should.” Such failures can have tragic consequences. For instance, the NMC cleared a midwife who had been referred to it following the avoidable death of a baby in Morecambe Bay in 2008. In 2016, the same midwife was linked to the death of another baby, and subsequently dismissed by their trust for actions fundamentally below acceptable standards. This cannot continue, and if we are to deliver on our maternity safety ambitions, we need an effective, culturally healthy regulator. The NMC still has a long way to go until it could contribute in this way. The Government must continue to offer rigorous scrutiny, demanding accountability and ensuring that the NMC becomes the regulator that nurses and midwives, as well as the public as a whole, deserve. To sum up, each year babies die who should not have died, every year mothers are failed and harmed, and every year parents experience profound loss without the support to deal with it. We cannot continue as we are. We have both an opportunity and an obligation to act. This Government have the chance to drive a change that will be felt in the lives of families for generations. To do this, we must deliver on the full potential of a national investigation. Clear, impactful and binding actions must address systemic weaknesses and embedded cultures. To ensure long-term focus, we must also adopt ambitious, measurable targets to align with the NHS 10-year plan. These steps to reduce baby loss must come in tandem with a compassionate system of care for those who do experience loss despite our best efforts. To this end, the Government should issue national guidance on commissioning specialist mental health services for bereaved parents. Finally, the Government must ensure the sector has capable and accountable regulators to ensure that professional standards are maintained. Taken together, we can make what has been a story of national tragedy into one of national pride, delivering compassionate and exemplary care for women and babies when they need it most. This is the challenge and the opportunity before us, and we must not fall short.

How to read this

Speeches

Earlier years