Aphra Brandreth MP: speeches

Speeches

• 24 Jun 2025 · Mental Health Bill [ Lords ] (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We have seen examples where regulators have not intervened quickly or robustly enough, and where systemic issues went unnoticed or unaddressed for far too long. We need to strengthen the remit and ensure that the CQC is properly equipped and held to the high standards that we expect of it. I am an economist by background, so evaluation is something I think about a great deal. Reform, however well intentioned, must be followed by evidence, scrutiny and a willingness to learn and improve. The new clause ensures that we do not just set change in motion, but that we stop to ask whether it is working, whether the right things are being done, and if not, how we can improve. The review required by the new clause would look not only backwards at whether the regulator has effectively carried out its existing duties under the Act, but, crucially, forwards, assessing whether it is ready to meet the responsibilities placed on it by the new reforms. I particularly welcome the requirement for the review to be published and laid before Parliament. Transparency is essential. It would allow Parliament to scrutinise but also gives patients, families, professionals and the public confidence that those questions are being asked seriously and answered publicly. Ultimately, the new clause is about improving outcomes. When regulation works well it safeguards dignity, prevents harm, identifies and spreads good practice, develops trust and helps us build a system where the principles of this Bill—choice, autonomy, less restriction and greater therapeutic benefit—are not just written in statute, but visible in practice. That is especially important in mental health care, where so often the people subject to the Act are among the most vulnerable. Those in in-patient settings, particularly those who are detained, are often not in a position to advocate for themselves. They rely on a system that is vigilant, takes its safeguarding responsibilities seriously and puts patients’ rights first. I hope that all members of this Committee will support the new clause. It is collaborative in its intent, constructive in its purpose and essential to delivering the meaningful reform that we all want to see. It reinforces the importance of accountability, transparency and listening to those most affected by this legislation. We owe it to those individuals and their families to make sure that we not only change the law, but also the culture and oversight that surrounds it. This review would help us do exactly that.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Mental Health Bill [ Lords ] (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. I rise to speak in support of amendments 44 and 45, which have been tabled by my hon. Friend the shadow Minister. These amendments seek to put patients at the centre of the Bill by promoting a safe therapeutic environment and recovery from any childhood trauma. Clause 8 provides for a new definition of “appropriate medical treatment”, which requires that treatment to have “a reasonable prospect of alleviating, or preventing the worsening of…a patient’s mental disorder.” Amendment 44 would introduce an additional criterion to the definition of “appropriate medical treatment” by establishing that an appropriate medical treatment should not only address the individual’s immediate health needs, but be designed with the intent to reduce psychological distress and actively support an individual’s recovery from the effects of childhood trauma. This recognises the long-term impact that early, adverse experience can have on mental and emotional wellbeing and ensures that treatment approaches are trauma-informed, compassionate and conducive to long-term improvement. People who present with serious mental health concerns need to know that they are receiving support and care in the right environment. They are at their most vulnerable, and having the confidence in their environment can make a world of difference. That is particularly pertinent for those who have suffered childhood trauma. It is important that we deal with the consequences of mental ill health, and adequately address the root causes. Among these, childhood trauma is one of the most serious and persistent factors contributing to long-term psychological conditions. By supporting this amendment, we would create a more resilient system that is equipped to respond to the reality and prevalence of childhood trauma in our society. I recently met with Alison, who heads up a fantastic organisation called WeMindTheGap. It is based in Wrexham, but it is now moving and expanding to cover parts of my constituency, Chester South and Eddisbury. It does a fantastic job supporting young people who have struggled in the conventional education system, are absent from school or have dropped out of the system. We discussed childhood trauma and the rise in the number of young people not currently in any kind of education. One of the points that Alison made that resonated with me is that absence from school is linked not just to deprivation, but many contributing factors, including difficult domestic situations, isolation and rural isolation. Many of these challenges are the most severe ones linked to childhood trauma, and although there are many wonderful organisations stepping in to support young people at an early stage, for some the impacts of childhood trauma continue to affect psychological wellbeing into adulthood. Sadly, childhood trauma is a societal issue that we face, and it is more common that we might imagine. Therefore, a step to embed trauma-informed care into the legal framework, specifically for childhood trauma, is a step in the right direction. Childhood trauma can lead to self-destructive behaviour in adults. There is, as my hon. Friend pointed out, evidence to show that it is a causal factor. We must recognise the long-term impact of adverse childhood experiences on mental health. This amendment, by adding a new criterion to the definition of “appropriate medical treatment” to require that treatment to aim to minimise distress and to support recovery from childhood trauma, would embed trauma-informed care into the legal framework. Amendment 45, by inserting the words “seeks to minimise the patient’s distress and promote their psychological wellbeing and recovery from any childhood trauma”, would reduce the risk of re-traumatisation. Responses to symptoms or behaviours must be supported; it is about helping people to move towards genuine recovery. Childhood trauma is unique, and it presents symptoms that are different from other mental health illnesses. Therefore, having a dedicated, compassionate and person-centred approach to care is incredibly important. Setting the right culture to support patients, recognising the trauma that they carry and ensuring that there is adequate support and provisions in the legislation and the legal framework, is the right approach. I am therefore pleased to support these amendments, which would strengthen clause 8.

• 27 Feb 2025 · St David’s Day and Welsh Affairs · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to contribute to this debate marking St David’s Day, and to celebrate the rich culture, history and contribution of Wales to our shared Union. My constituency of Chester South and Eddisbury shares part of its western border with north Wales, and the ties between us run deep. Many of my constituents cross the border daily for work, school and appointments, and to visit family and friends. In fact, Wales is particularly close to my heart because my mother was born in Swansea. Our past relationship with Wales, however, has not always been as cordial and amicable. Henry, Prince of Wales, who would go on to become Henry V, was named Earl of Chester in September 1403. He used his powers over the city of Chester to order that all Welsh people and Welsh sympathisers should be expelled from the city following the battle of Shrewsbury, caused by a Welsh uprising. During the battle, Henry sustained a nasty injury as a result of an arrow. That led to him becoming slightly paranoid about the prospect of further Welsh uprisings and pushed him to pass a law that said that a Welshman was not permitted to enter Chester before sunrise or stay after sunset. If he did, he would be subject to the penalty of decapitation. I am relieved to say that law is no longer in place, as it would certainly put a dampener on our tourism industry, not to mention my family gatherings. It also led to the urban myth that it is legal to shoot a Welshman with a longbow after midnight in Chester on a Sunday, so long as he is within the city walls. I have recently taken up archery, but let me assure the House that it is not with the intention of testing the legality of this law. Despite such moments of strained relations, we have always been linked by geography, trade and shared experiences. Chester’s strategic location made it a key military stronghold for the Romans, the Mercians, the Normans and, most notably, Edward I during his conquest of Wales. Thankfully, our cross-border exchanges these days involve much less castle storming and much more co-operation. In the first and second world wars, the Cheshire regiment fought alongside Welsh contingents in some of the most challenging campaigns, including Gallipoli. That legacy of co-operation and mutual support is something we should celebrate. Cheshire and north Wales share a deep connection across multiple areas. I will briefly refer to two of them: our shared economy and our shared infrastructure. Our local economies in Cheshire and north Wales are very much co-dependent. Our rural economy is supported on both sides of the border by growers and producers. In a recent Westminster Hall debate on agricultural property relief, I intervened on the hon. Member for Caerfyrddin (Ann Davies) to highlight the importance of farming to our economies. I was struck when she said in response that her farm supplies milk to a major food producer in my constituency—I did not know that. That coincidence illustrates perfectly how we work to support each other, particularly in the rural economy. Our local economies are deeply interconnected—many workers from my constituency commute to industrial sites, such as Airbus in Broughton and Deeside, and many people commute from Wales to work in my constituency. Of course, visitors from Wales help to drive Chester’s tourism and hospitality sector. It goes both ways: many of my constituents enjoy weekend trips to the north Welsh coast, whether for a stroll along Llandudno’s promenade or a well-earned break on Anglesey. It is important that we continue to share a close economic relationship going forward, because both Cheshire and Wales are net contributors to our respective economies, and together we lead the way in innovation and entrepreneurship in so many ways. A strong economy must be supported by strong infrastructure, which brings me to my second point. We have great potential for growth in north-west England and north Wales, but often our infrastructure does not meet demand. I have spoken in this House about the need to electrify the trainline between Crewe—our major rail hub—and Chester. However, if we are serious about growth and stimulating our economy, the north Wales main line should be electrified all the way to Holyhead to unlock its full potential. Road infrastructure is equally vital. Many of the roads that run through my constituency of Chester South and Eddisbury, such as the A51 or the north Wales expressway, are critical for freight and connectivity, particularly those linking the port of Holyhead to Liverpool and Manchester. Yet some roads, including the A51, are not suited to the volume and type of traffic that they now carry. When heavy goods vehicles pass through villages such as Clotton and Duddon, where homes and Duddon St Peter’s Church of England primary school sit right on the road, it is clear that improvements must be made. I hope that the Government will, in partnership with their Welsh counterparts, continue to build on the positive momentum put in place by the previous Government on delivering the transport upgrades that both sides of the border need. As St David’s Day approaches, the future of Wales as part of the United Kingdom is bright and exciting.

• 11 Nov 2024 · Mental Health: Farming and Agricultural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for sharing that. The impact of APR will be felt across the community. Unfortunately, in a community that is struggling with mental health, it is an extra blow. Later, I will offer some thoughts on how we might better prevent mental health problems, but I will briefly mention a few other reasons why mental health issues are disproportionately higher in rural areas. First, there is the issue of isolation, which is multifaceted. It can be attributed to literal isolation, because farmers live in sparsely populated areas far from the nearest village; digital isolation, as they are without broadband or mobile coverage; and physical isolation from a lack of transport links. That issue keenly felt in my constituency, where many rural areas have little or no public transport connections. A mixture of those forms of isolation means that people in rural areas, such as farmers, often suffer from loneliness. It is not easy for people to go to the local pub or café to talk to friends and neighbours when they live in the countryside. It is harder to get to those places, and harder to make time to socialise due to the demands of farming. There is also the issue of rural reticence. There has historically been a stigma surrounding mental health; sadly, although we have made good progress in breaking down barriers and encouraging people to talk, there remains a reticence in rural and agricultural communities to talk about problems or feelings. It is not because of hubris or arrogance. Rather, the “I’ll manage myself” culture comes from a desire not to burden neighbours and friends who are also in the community, and will no doubt be facing the same challenges. I am confident that we can do more as a society to break down this barrier and encourage farmers to talk honestly and openly with one another.