Clive Jones MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

• 25 Jun 2026 · National Lung Cancer Screening Programme · Hansard source

  More

  I would just like to mention a few of the things that hon. Members have spoken about. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) was absolutely right to pay tribute to the Government for their work on lung cancer screening. That is an outstanding success, but screening still needs more support from the Government because, as he says, screening saves lives. My hon. Friend the Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) talked about lung cancer being horrific and deadly, and he spoke about his constituent John, who probably thought, when he got his diagnosis, “This is going to be horrific and deadly for me.” Because of the lung cancer screening programme, it looks like he might have a few good years ahead of him, so that is really good. My hon. Friend also talked about the speed and quality of treatment, and how important it is that we are quick with our diagnoses, that we are quick with our treatment and that our cancer patients have the support of specialist nurses. The hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans) is absolutely right that early detection is crucial in lung cancer treatment, as he knows from being a junior doctor once upon a time. He is also right to say that the origin of the screening programme was under the Conservatives in 2023, and he is right to join other Members in asking for lung screening to be spread out to all parts of the United Kingdom. I thank the Minister for coming to the debate today and for answering an awful lot of the questions that we asked him. I know that he is here on behalf of the Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, the hon. Member for Washington and Gateshead South (Mrs Hodgson), who is, I know, a real champion for improving cancer care in this country. I think it is great that the Government are committing £650 million for lung cancer screening in England to be spent by 2030, but what about Scotland and Northern Ireland? Is the Minister able to make a commitment that the Department will speak to the devolved Governments of Scotland and Northern Ireland to try to get them to implement what has been done so well in England, or does he need to speak to the Under-Secretary of State? We did not get a guarantee that lung cancer—

• 25 Jun 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Pubs are the lifeblood of our local communities. In Wokingham, we are very lucky to have so many great pubs. To try to help them, I ran my “Wokingham’s Best Pub” competition, recognising the value of pubs and their staff. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating The Two Poplars, which won the best pub competition last Friday, and, as I know he likes to support local pubs, will he consider joining me for a pint in The Two Poplars, where he will find good beer and good food?

• 25 Jun 2026 · Public Procurement: SMEs · Hansard source

  More

  Public procurement must do more to support SMEs in Wokingham and across the UK who are doing their best to grow, despite what many see as a lack of help from the Government. In defence, only 5% of the procurement budget is allocated to SMEs. How will the Government change public procurement to benefit SMEs and the economy?

• 24 Jun 2026 · Elections: First Past the Post · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) for securing this important debate. Our politics is not fit for purpose and is not working for people up and down the country. It is becoming increasingly adversarial and divisive. The first-past-the-post system actively encourages parties not to work together, which allows the Government to avoid accountability and ignore the voices of the people who put them into Parliament. I have heard from so many of my constituents in Wokingham who are sick of feeling ignored by politics in Westminster and feel that the system—and, therefore, the Government—does not work for them. People in Wokingham and across the country want to know that they will be represented in Parliament by somebody they have an affinity with, and they want their vote to have counted. As a very young teenager, still at school and unable to vote, I witnessed the general election of February 1974. I wanted the Liberals to win. They increased their vote to 18%, and their seats in the House of Commons increased from eight to 14. If the result had been proportional, they should have had 110 Members, and it would have been a properly balanced Parliament, which I am sure would have dealt with the issues of the day better than the Wilson and Callaghan Governments. I saw that as a massive injustice, and it helped to drive my interest in politics. My Lib Dem colleagues and I have long called for fair votes through proportional representation. As a party, we have spearheaded the campaign for electoral reform in Parliament. Electoral reform is by no means a panacea for this country’s problems, but a much better, more democratic electoral system is a fundamental step towards politicians representing the country properly. That is why this Government must replace the first-past-the-post system with proportional representation for both general and local elections in England. Democracy can be revived by strengthening our democratic institutions and by taking the big money out of politics. The Government need to cap donations to political parties and stop foreign oligarchs and crypto billionaires interfering in our democracy. How can anyone think that a £5 million gift with no strings attached, or whatever the reason for the gift is, can be nothing to do with anyone except the recipient? These attitudes in our politics are very dangerous. Politicians should represent and be accountable to their constituents first and foremost—not some millionaire, or even billionaire, who may or may not pay UK taxes. Politicians cannot afford to take voters for granted as successive Labour and Conservative Governments have. We need to repair the damage of years of sleaze, cronyism and rule-breaking and end the era of neglect. We need a political system with fair representation that makes politics work for all our constituents again.

• 24 Jun 2026 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  I associate myself with the Prime Minister’s remarks. His Government can be really proud of the national cancer plan. Cancer patients in Wokingham and across the country cannot afford for it not to be implemented or regularly updated. Will the Prime Minister leave a lasting legacy and support my private Member’s Bill—the National Cancer Strategy Bill—to ensure that future Governments remain accountable for delivering the plan’s targets and ambitions?

• 24 Jun 2026 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q1. If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 24 June.

• 22 Jun 2026 · SEND Improvement Plans: Multi-academy Trusts · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for her answer. Without clear levers, accountability cannot be guaranteed and the Department cannot ensure that SEND reforms translate into consistent, high-quality support for children and their families on the ground. Will the Minister clarify what specific and enforceable powers local authorities will have to ensure that multi-academy trusts play their full part in delivering local area SEND plans?

• 22 Jun 2026 · SEND Improvement Plans: Multi-academy Trusts · Hansard source

  More

  2. What assessment her Department has made of the potential impact of planned SEND reforms on the ability of local authorities to effectively co-operate with multi-academy trusts on the delivery of local area SEND improvement plans.

• 18 Jun 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Grassroots sports clubs such as Wokingham Town football club are at the heart of our communities, but many clubs struggle to find and maintain facilities and equipment. Would the Secretary of State consider convening twice-yearly meetings with grassroots sports governing bodies to strengthen collaboration and advocacy for community sport?

• 18 Jun 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Eight months after changes to FP69 flagging were made, GPs in Wokingham remain concerned that many patients marked for removal from lists are from ethnic minority backgrounds or other vulnerable groups. Will the Leader of the House make time so that Department of Health and Social Care Ministers can update the House on whether an equality impact assessment has been undertaken or whether one is planned?

• 16 Jun 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T5. Last month, two people were convicted of spying on Hong Kong dissidents in the UK on behalf of the Hong Kong Government. Alarmingly, one was a UK immigration officer. What is the Minister doing to better protect Hongkongers in Wokingham and across the UK who are concerned about growing Chinese influence threatening their freedom and safety?

• 16 Jun 2026 · Thames Water · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Residents in Wokingham have endured years of sewage dumping by Thames Water and ever-rising bills, while stakeholders have lined their pockets. The current ownership model is unsustainable, so will the Minister consider the Liberal Democrats’ call for water companies to be mutually-owned public benefit corporations, putting customers and the environment first, rather than prioritising the interests of creditors and financial institutions?

• 15 Jun 2026 · Brain Cancer · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for that very good intervention, which is also very timely as I come to the end of my speech. She is absolutely right that leadership is needed. I have every confidence in this Minister that there will be some leadership, and I think that the large number of MPs in this Chamber today shows that there are many people in this Parliament who want her to succeed and to show the leadership that we need.

• 15 Jun 2026 · Brain Cancer · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for talking about Zoe Wilson. For her family, it must have been absolutely devastating to have had that diagnosis. I am happy to mention her, alongside him, in the debate. Brain cancer has one of the lowest survival rates of any type of cancer, with only a quarter of adults surviving five years after they have been diagnosed. Diagnosis is often too late, and access to groundbreaking treatments is not widely available. It is a scandal that so many people live in treatment deserts and are forced to drive long journeys for treatment, often after weeks of waiting for it to begin. My Liberal Democrat colleagues—I am sure everyone in this Chamber—believe that everyone deserves high-quality care, no matter where they live. That is why we have long been calling for an end to the postcode lottery in healthcare. Shamefully, the UK is lagging behind comparable nations in brain cancer treatment. I recognise that research into brain tumours is uniquely challenging, and yet with our world-beating life sciences sector, universities and the NHS, the UK should be a world leader in cancer research. My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I welcome the national cancer plan. The plan’s commitment to improve early diagnosis of brain cancers, to introduce new target treatments and to incentivise research and investment in rare cancers, including brain cancer, are positive steps forward, but turning those commitments into impacts will need leadership, investment and accountability, all of which are proving difficult in an NHS engaged in a distracting and costly reorganisation, at a time of already highly constrained resources and unprecedented demand. Furthermore, the plan’s goal for the UK to be in the top 25% of countries for brain cancer survival rates by 2035 could be seen as a lack of ambition, given the potential of the UK life sciences and research sector. For the UK to become a world leader in cancer research, the Liberal Democrats would pass a cancer survival research Act, requiring the Government to co-ordinate and ensure funding for the least survivable cancers, including brain cancer.

• 15 Jun 2026 · Brain Cancer · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is absolutely right that we need to spend more on investment in research and treatment. In addition, the Tessa Jowell Brain Cancer Mission estimates that just over two thirds of treatment centres in England currently offer whole-genome sequencing, which is essential to provide improved diagnosis and treatment options. Advances in genomics have offered great promise to people with brain cancer and the UK has taken steps to become a world leader in genomic research. However, progress has stalled, with genomic services across the UK not being set up to facilitate research. To ensure that brain cancer patients do not miss out on potentially life-saving treatment, the UK’s national test directories need to be expanded. Sadly, many people with brain cancer were let down by the last Conservative Government, who broke their promise on a 10-year cancer plan, which would have made a real difference to patients. The national cancer plan will hopefully be an opportunity to address meaningfully many of these issues, including patchy data collection and shortages in the cancer workforce. On that last point, it is worth mentioning that we, NHS staff and patients are still waiting for the long-delayed workforce plan. It was due in the spring, but we will soon be in mid-summer. A workforce plan is so important. We need further investment in the research workforce, with support for clinical and non-clinical career development to build our research capacity. As others have already said today, the development of a proper and improved workforce plan is desperately needed. That is why the Liberal Democrats would start a fellowship programme for US cancer scientists who have seen their funding gutted by Donald Trump. We would waive burdensome fees and bureaucracy for international researchers. Astonishingly, global talent visas for top researchers cost £6,000 per person for a five-year visa. So, a leading scientist has to find £24,000 if they have a partner and two children who they want to bring to the UK with them. That is much more expensive than most of our competitor countries, where the cost is typically £200 or £300 per person. Do we really need to make it so expensive for much-needed research talent to come to the UK? And can the Minister look at this issue? For the sake of patients and their families, I hope that—

• 15 Jun 2026 · Brain Cancer · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I thank the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for securing the debate. He is a true champion for people suffering with brain cancers. I also pay tribute to and recognise the excellent work of the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh). I pay tribute to everyone who worked hard on this important petition, especially Georgie Maynard and Sarah Bainbridge. It was a privilege to join Georgie and other campaigners in March to submit the petition to No. 10. A brain cancer diagnosis is utterly devastating and life changing. More than 12,000 people a year are diagnosed with this brutal condition.

• 15 Jun 2026 · Brain Cancer · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member makes a very good point, and I absolutely agree with her. In that context, it is it is shocking that much of the funding promised for research in honour of Dame Tessa Jowell in 2018 is yet to be spent. Still about 75% of brain cancer research funding comes from charitable organisations; not enough comes from the Government.

• 11 Jun 2026 · Secondary Breast Cancer · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for putting his support on the record. This debate is very important: it gives us the opportunity to highlight the experiences of people living with secondary breast cancer and the action needed to support them. One of the biggest challenges is the lack of reliable data. It is estimated that about 61,000 people in the UK are living with secondary breast cancer, but we do not know that for certain. The disease remains under-recognised, poorly tracked and inadequately recorded. People living with secondary breast cancer are still not consistently counted. Too often, they are invisible within the health system, making it harder to provide the tailored treatment, services and support that they need. Some 20 years ago, data collection on metastatic breast cancer was identified as a priority by Breast Cancer Now’s secondary breast cancer taskforce. Progress was made in 2013 when mandatory data collection was introduced, and subsequent strategies have promised further improvements, but we are still flying blind. The first two national audits of metastatic breast cancer were unable to provide a complete picture, because recurrence data remains insufficient, both in quality and in completeness. The audit has demonstrated just how important it is that the issue be addressed: without accurate data, the NHS cannot properly plan services, allocate resources or understand the scale of need. Better data could also help to address continuing gaps in access to clinical nurse specialists for people with metastatic breast cancer. Most importantly, people living with the disease are left feeling that they do not count, because the system cannot guarantee the support that they need. The reality is simple: if we do not know how many people have the disease, we cannot hope to support them effectively. This challenge is not unique to the UK; it is a global issue, and international collaboration can help us to learn from best practice elsewhere, but we should be leading the way. That is why the Government’s national cancer plan is so important. The plan commits to defining and counting recurrent cancers, starting with metastatic breast cancer in 2026. That commitment must now be delivered in full, and Parliament must hold the Government to account on achieving it. The ongoing work of the national disease registration service with NHS trusts to improve data collection is encouraging, but progress will require national leadership and accountability. I am delighted that the hon. Member for West Lancashire is here today. Ashley Dalton was the Minister who drove the national cancer plan through Parliament.

• 11 Jun 2026 · Secondary Breast Cancer · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered secondary breast cancer. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Betts. I declare an interest as a governor of the Royal Berkshire hospital; a family member also holds shares in a medical company. It is a privilege to speak in today’s debate on incurable secondary breast cancer, a debate that the hon. Member for City of Durham (Mary Kelly Foy) and I have brought to Westminster Hall. I thank the many healthcare professionals, charities and life science organisations that have provided valuable information ahead of the debate. I also thank the patients and the charities Breast Cancer Now, Make 2nds Count and METUP UK, who are represented today in the Public Gallery, for their work and support. I would like to recognise everyone involved in the Moments That Count campaign exhibition last November, particularly the brave testimonies from Claire, Laura, Jo, Lisa and Juliet. As I have mentioned many times in Parliament, I am a breast cancer survivor. That experience showed me the importance of early diagnosis and effective treatment, not only for survival but for the quality of life. My own diagnosis was delayed: I was initially sent away by the first GP I saw, and I waited several months before being diagnosed. During that time, the cancer spread to my lymph glands, which had to be removed. Eighteen years later, I still experience the consequences, most recently just a few weeks ago. Fortunately, my treatment was successful. For those living with secondary breast cancer, however, a cure is not an option. Secondary breast cancer occurs when the disease spreads to other parts of the body. Treatments can slow its progression and give people more time, but it cannot be cured. About 11,500 women and 90 men die from breast cancer every year, and most of those deaths are caused by secondary breast cancer. For those living with the disease, every extra month matters, yet too often their voices are not heard, their needs are not recognised and time runs out.

• 11 Jun 2026 · Secondary Breast Cancer · Hansard source

  More

  I did mention the hon. Member’s constituency first, but I take your guidance, Mr Betts—my apologies for that. I recently joined a meeting with the hon. Member and with charities including Breast Cancer Now, Breast Cancer Network Australia and Rethink Breast Cancer. Together those charities are working across the UK, Australia and Canada to improve metastatic breast cancer data and ensure that patients’ voices are heard. The message is clear: if we do not count people, we cannot support them. Collecting and publishing this data is essential, because people with metastatic breast cancer count. Alongside better data, timely access to new treatments is critical. Secondary breast cancer may be incurable, but advances in medicine have transformed outcomes or many patients, giving them more time with the people they love. However, too many patients still struggle to access life-extending treatments on the NHS. One example is Enhertu, a treatment for people with HER2-low metastatic breast cancer. It has the potential to extend and improve lives, yet it was rejected for routine NHS use in England in 2024 on cost grounds. As a result, many patients have been unable to access the treatment that they need. Meanwhile, Enhertu is already available in 26 European countries, including Scotland. England is falling behind. Recent changes to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s cost-effectiveness threshold provide an important opportunity to revisit that decision. I urge Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, NICE and NHS England to work together to reach an agreement so that patients can access and benefit from Enhertu. More broadly, concerns remain about how NICE assesses medicines and about the impact on innovation and access to treatments, particularly following the introduction of the severity modifier in 2022. Even after recent changes, the threshold for approving some medicines for metastatic cancer remains lower than before 2022. NICE has estimated that the revisions may result in only three to five additional medicines being approved each year. It is the patients who pay the price. Life-extending treatments exist, but they are not always available to those who need them most. That cannot be right. The commitments in the national cancer plan to streamline medicine approvals and accelerate clinical trials are welcome. The recent UK-US pharmaceutical agreements, including commitments to strengthen support for the life sciences sector, are likewise welcome, but without meaningful investment in innovative medicines for severe conditions, access will remain limited and patients will continue to miss opportunities for longer and better lives. Support services also remain inadequate. Clinical nurse specialists play a vital role in guiding patients through complex treatment pathways and providing emotional support, yet many people with secondary breast cancer still do not have access to a clinical nurse specialist. Even among those who do, a quarter have not seen their specialist since diagnosis, and only 65% feel that their specialist has enough time for them. The reason is simple: caseloads are too high. We must recognise the profound emotional impact of secondary breast cancer. More than a quarter of patients say that they did not receive enough mental health support. Many need greater support for their family as well. The NHS long-term plan promised every cancer patient access to a clinical nurse specialist or support worker. That commitment must now be delivered for people with secondary breast cancer who need specialist expertise to navigate this complex disease. People living with metastatic breast cancer do not have time to wait. They need to be counted. They need access to the support they deserve. They need rapid access to treatments that can give them more precious time with the people they love. I ask the Minister for two clear commitments. First, will she set out a timeline for delivering the national cancer plan’s commitment to define and count recurrent cancers, starting with metastatic breast cancer in 2026, and will she outline any plans to make the data that is currently held by the national disease registration service publicly available? Secondly, what are the Government doing to support metastatic breast cancer patients who may miss out on life-extending medicines because of pricing and access barriers?

• 11 Jun 2026 · Secondary Breast Cancer · Hansard source

  More

  I thank all the hon. Members who contributed to this debate. Many shared their own personal experiences, and those of their constituents. I know that that can be a very difficult thing to share, so I commend everyone for their participation. The debate has made it clear that there is a real need for urgent action, and I hope that the Minister has taken note of the issues that have been shared. The hon. Member for City of Durham (Mary Kelly Foy) talked about the need to improve data, as several of us did, because we cannot support people properly without data. I think, from the Minister’s response, that she probably gets that, so that is really good. My hon. Friends the Members for Horsham (John Milne) and for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) highlighted issues relating to lobular cancer and the need for specific pathways to treatment. They also mentioned the effect of cancer on families. I must say, still today, 18 years after I had to have it, the hardest conversation that I have ever had was with my 13-year-old and 14-year-old daughters to tell them that I had breast cancer. The effect that breast cancer has on families is immense. We saw this afternoon one of the most passionate speeches in this House on breast cancer from the hon. Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton). She has been a really, really good—

• 11 Jun 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  The rebuild at the Royal Berkshire hospital has been delayed twice: six years by the Conservatives and seven years by this Government. At Prime Minister’s questions, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), asked whether the Government were considering slashing the hospital building programme to fund the defence investment plan. He did not receive an answer. Will the Leader of the House make time for a statement to the House to find out the Government’s intention to fund both the new hospital building programme and our national defence?

• 11 Jun 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety has outlined the potential benefits of changing default speed limits on urban and rural minor roads to 20 mph. What is the Department’s position on that, and will it be reflected in the next guidance for local transport authorities on setting local speed limits?

• 8 Jun 2026 · Water Companies · Hansard source

  More

  In my constituency, sewage was spilt from the Arborfield treatment works 28 times last year, and in the last few days sewage has poured into the Emm brook. Given the numerous repeated sewage spillages in Wokingham and across the country, will the Minister back the Liberal Democrat proposals for a mutually owned public benefit model for water companies, focusing investment on the environment, customers and replacing and repairing infrastructure rather than on lining the pockets of water company shareholders and senior managers?

• 4 Jun 2026 · Violence against Women and Girls · Hansard source

  More

  Too many abusers are escaping justice in family courts, and my constituents have suffered as a result. Kaleidoscopic UK in my constituency has long called for independent experts to help to spot and advise against the manipulative tactics used by abusers in family courts. When will the Minister commit to implementing independent domestic violence advisers in family courts?