Clive Jones MP: speeches

Speeches

• 3 Jul 2025 · NHS 10-Year Plan · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the Secretary of State’s 10-year plan. In October, in response to my Westminster Hall debate on the national cancer plan, the Government committed to publishing one later this year. I am confident that that will happen in the autumn, and the wider cancer community is equally enthusiastic. However, the 10-year plan announced today makes only a brief mention of the national cancer plan. Can the Secretary of State confirm that improved diagnosis, improved screening for at-risk groups, improved treatment outcomes, concentration on rare cancers and cancers in young people, better and continued workforce planning, more support and funding for research, better relationships with drug companies and much more will be part of the national cancer plan?

• 2 Jul 2025 · Rare Cancers Bill · Hansard source

  More

  When the national cancer strategy is published, I hope that part of it will focus on boosting the survival rates for rare cancers. Will the Minister confirm that that will be an important part of the strategy?

• 1 Jul 2025 · Waterloo-Reading Line: Class 701 Trains · Hansard source

  More

  I completely agree with my hon. Friend; we do need to improve rolling stock. Part of our problem on the South Western Railway line, Wokingham to Waterloo, is that it is old rolling stock, which is what this debate is about. He also mentioned better access for disabled people, and I 100% agree that that is absolutely needed. Although I am aware of a few Arterio trains running on the South Western Railway network, that is still not the case on the Waterloo to Reading line, which my constituents use every day. Numerous promises have been made by South Western Railway and the Department for Transport, but almost all of them have been broken. In 2019, the Department for Transport claimed that in the coming months new trains would be introduced on the South Western Railway network, but what has happened? Nothing. In 2020, the Arterio was destined to be first rolled out on the Waterloo to Reading line. In 2022, the South Western Railway business plan stated that SWR would “introduce the new Arterio fleet as soon as possible”. Two years ago, the Department for Transport stated that the trains would be in service as soon as possible in 2023. Last year, SWR stated that the roll-out of the full fleet would take up to 18 months from January 2024, and I was informed that the trains would be ready for me to travel in to Parliament by June 2025. Now, in 2025, SWR still does not have a final timeline for when my constituents will get to benefit from the new trains. Every year promises have been made, and every year promises have been broken. With SWR nationalised, the Department for Transport must scrutinise the project relentlessly until it is properly delivered. I ask the Minister: when will the Arterio trains be in service on the Waterloo to Reading line? I would also be grateful if he would set out in detail what steps are being taken to ensure that the Department for Transport does not allow the delays to be extended any further. I remind Members that the previous Conservative Government were completely complacent on this matter. No contractual penalties were imposed on the owning company of SWR, despite its failure to deliver with taxpayers’ cash. Did the Department for Transport consider imposing penalties when Labour was elected in July 2024? If not, why not? On 9 June 2025, in response to a written parliamentary question tabled on 30 May 2025, the Minister stated: “The new Managing Director of SWR is now developing a detailed plan” for introducing the Arterio fleet. Did such a plan not exist under the previous, privatised version of SWR? When can we expect the plan to be completed, and will it be available for scrutiny by Members of this House? Finally, will the Minister extend an invitation from me to meet the Minister of State for Rail to discuss these issues in more detail?

• 1 Jul 2025 · Waterloo-Reading Line: Class 701 Trains · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered the introduction of Class 701 trains on the Waterloo-Reading line. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Butler. I am honoured to have secured this debate on a matter close to the hearts and frayed nerves of many in my Wokingham constituency. Imagine, Ms Butler, that you are one of my constituents commuting to London or Reading. You spot your train on the horizon—the all-too-familiar blue face and red shell of the class 455 train, built in 1983 and rattling along for 42 years. That sight will produce an inevitable sigh of despair from all at the train station: it will not be a comfortable journey. Hon. Members might wonder what is so bad about that rolling relic. For starters, on a day like today, when we have 34 degrees of heat, if they step inside the train, they will be treated to a delightful 45°C sauna, courtesy of no air conditioning and poor ventilation. Despite the journey from Wokingham to Waterloo taking an hour and 12 minutes, there are no toilet facilities on board. Speed restrictions apply exclusively to the 455 on the Waterloo to Reading route, which means slower journeys and greater delays. That is why the class 455 is being replaced by the new, sleek class 701, also known as the Arterio. The Arterio train will mean air conditioning, real-time passenger information, more seating and actual toilets. However, the journey to introduce the new trains has encountered unacceptable delays, setbacks and uncertainty that go unresolved to this very day, despite the fact that they were promised nearly eight years ago.

• 1 Jul 2025 · ADHD: Impact on Prison Rehabilitation and Reoffending · Hansard source

  More

  I think all Members present will have heard from desperate parents whose children cannot get the ADHD medication that they need. Does my hon. Friend agree that the scandalous failure to provide care sets those children up to fail and that, tragically, the consequences are that some end up as the offenders we are discussing, instead of fulfilling their full potential?

• 26 Jun 2025 · Local Bus Services · Hansard source

  More

  Bus usage and services in rural and semi-rural areas such as Wokingham were particularly hard hit during the pandemic. Will the Minister confirm that councils such as Wokingham will not see funding for local bus services reduced, and will he recognise that rebuilding bus usage in rural areas is a unique challenge that requires extra resources?

• 26 Jun 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  My constituents constantly tell me that Thames Water is failing in its duties and has no financial future. In spite of its failings, we are reliant on it for the most basic human needs of water and sanitation. Will the Leader of the House allow us Government time to scrutinise in detail the merits of turning Thames Water into a public benefit company?

• 19 Jun 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Elusive Brewing, a fantastic independent brewery in my constituency of Wokingham, brews Oregon Trail, which won best IPA at the Champion Beer of Britain awards. Can we have a debate in Government time on the steps that Ministers are taking to support the people of Wokingham in enjoying great local products, such as those from Elusive Brewing and Siren Craft Brew, in their local pubs? Perhaps the Leader of the House, and you, Mr Speaker, would like to join me for a pint from one of those excellent breweries.

• 17 Jun 2025 · Prostate Cancer Treatment · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Member reiterate a question that I have for the Minister? Specifically, given that abiraterone is already approved for use in Scotland and Wales, what action is the Minister taking to ensure that men in England are not disadvantaged in accessing lifesaving cancer treatments?

• 17 Jun 2025 · Access to GPs · Hansard source

  More

  The Government’s additional roles reimbursement scheme led to just three new GPs for my constituents in Wokingham, which is a drop in the ocean. More needs to be done to deliver GP practices in new developments such as Arborfield in south Wokingham. Why did Ministers not support the Liberal Democrat amendment to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill that would have made commitments to build GP surgeries in all new housing developments legally binding?

• 16 Jun 2025 · Windrush Day 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  The Windrush generation made a huge contribution to the life and the economy of the UK, but I want to pay tribute to the Hong Kong community in my constituency of Wokingham and across the United Kingdom, who I am sure will make the same contribution to the UK. I am deeply concerned that the Government are piling uncertainty and worry on British Hongkongers through their reforms to indefinite leave to remain. These people, who are living here in Britain, already fear retribution from China. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government should have their back and maintain the five-year pathway for British national overseas status holders?

• 12 Jun 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I declare my interest as a governor of the Royal Berkshire hospital. There is a chronic shortfall of staff in radiology and oncology. Those shortages mean that people find out they have cancer later and treatments are delayed, worsening survival rates. Is the Leader of the House aware that 2,910 more clinical radiologists could be recruited if money spent outsourcing demand was spent within the NHS? Can we have a debate in Government time to scrutinise those shortfalls?

• 12 Jun 2025 · Trade Agreements Programme · Hansard source

  More

  Yesterday the Chancellor championed the Government’s supposed trade deal with the United States, but that trade deal is not yet complete. We know that because no impact assessment has been published. Why are the Government popping the champagne prematurely, and have they done an impact assessment on any of the ongoing negotiations?

• 12 Jun 2025 · Spending Review: Health and Social Care · Hansard source

  More

  I was really saddened that there was no mention of cancer in the Minister’s statement, so I will give her the opportunity to correct that omission. Will this new money for our NHS ensure that all cancer waiting time targets are met by the end of this Parliament, and can the Minister confirm that those targets will be included in the 10-year health plan? Finally, have Ministers had a chance to read my 11-page letter and accompanying submission on what should be in the national cancer plan?

• 20 May 2025 · UK-EU Summit · Hansard source

  More

  In the UK-EU summit, co-operation on access to medicines was noticeably scarce. That is an area where we are falling massively behind compared with our European allies. Can the Prime Minister ask the Minister for Secondary Care to meet me, so that we can discuss why only 25% of new cancer medicines approved by the EU are fully available in the UK?

• 20 May 2025 · GP Services: Christchurch · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 20 May 2025 · GP Services: Christchurch · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

• 20 May 2025 · Adoption and Kinship Placements · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I thank the hon. Member for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith) for securing this important debate. The Government’s cuts to the adoption and special guardianship support fund are going to harm vulnerable children in my constituency of Wokingham and across England. Those children and their families will see vital therapies suspended, and they do not know when, or even if, they will resume. Prior to the cuts, one family received 264 hours of therapy, but that will now fall to just 32 hours. Will the Minister meet me and my constituents to discuss the cuts to the ASGSF, so that she can hear directly from those affected? Will she publish the analysis on which the changes to the ASGSF were made? Will she detail the level of consultation that was undertaken with service providers and adoptive and kinship families before the cuts were announced? Finally, I pay tribute to all the families who will be affected by the cuts, and ask them to continue their incredible work in fighting against them. I also thank my constituent, Clare Solomons, who has worked so hard in organising petitions, speaking in the media and being an invaluable source of advice on this issue. I hope the Minister will listen to the experience of families and reverse the cuts as soon as possible.

• 19 May 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T2. Will the Minister tell the House how much of the European Union’s €150 billion rearmament fund he anticipates will be available to our defence companies, who provide high quality jobs, and to our armed forces?

• 15 May 2025 · Product Regulation and Metrology Bill [Lords] (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his response. I am disappointed that he is not willing to back the new clause, which simply asks for transparency about enforcement capacity. Trading standards cannot enforce laws. It does not have the people or funding for it, and right now it is being asked to do more with less. The Bill risks being toothless without the resources to back it up. I intend to press the new clause to a Division. Question put, That the clause be read a Second time.

• 15 May 2025 · Product Regulation and Metrology Bill [Lords] (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his response and the hon. Member for West Worcestershire for her remarks. The Government accept that the batteries are high risk—which is welcome—so why not name them in the Bill? Consumers, firefighters and local authorities all want clarity and action. If the Bill is not the right vehicle, what is, and when will we see it? I intend to press the new clause to a Division. Question put, That the clause be read a Second time.

• 15 May 2025 · Product Regulation and Metrology Bill [Lords] (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. The new clause aims to ensure that online marketplaces are subject to clear, enforceable duties to protect consumers against unsafe products. Despite online marketplaces playing a central role in today’s retail environment, they often operate without the same responsibilities as traditional retailers, despite facilitating the sale of millions of pounds of goods to UK consumers. The new clause would put some common-sense requirements on online marketplaces. For example, it would require platforms to have effective systems in place to monitor and detect unsafe products and block them from being sold, and it includes a clear duty to remove unsafe products quickly once a risk has been flagged. Those basic consumer protection principles are applied to bricks-and-mortar retailers, so why not to online retailers? No platform should be able to profit from unsafe goods while claiming that it has no responsibility for what is sold. The current system simply is not working: 85% of the toys tested by the British Toy & Hobby Association, across 11 online marketplaces, failed toy safety testing and were delisted from sale. Despite that, it found that 72% of seemingly identical unsafe toys were back on sale, with 41% being sold by the same retailer. On testing a sample of 25 of the toys, all 25—100%—failed toy safety testing. As we modernise our product safety regime, we must ensure that online marketplaces are held to the same high standards as bricks-and-mortar shops. Bricks-and-mortar toy retailers are expected to deliver much more, with fewer resources. Some 80% of UK toy retailers are SMEs. If they want to supply a manufacturer’s product, they are obliged to ensure that the manufacturer has carried out the relevant compliance regulations. Additionally, importers have certain obligations and have to ensure that others have been carried out. Online marketplaces are not required to do any of this. Meanwhile, third-party sellers are often able to evade compliance with safety regulations, as online marketplaces have no obligation to verify that those sellers have met their legal responsibilities. Third-party sellers are often difficult or impossible to trace for enforcement. This means the cost of producing their toys is lower, so third-party sellers are able to sell their products more cheaply. The new clause would deliver fairness and essential protections. By embedding baseline requirements directly in primary legislation, the Bill will close regulatory gaps and ensure that secondary legislation can build on a solid foundation. Before I conclude, another issue that needs to be addressed is counterfeit products. Because of a lack of traceability and enforcement, many products sold in online marketplaces are counterfeit, leaving British consumers at risk of substandard goods that pose a risk to their health and waste their money. What are the Government doing to stop that? What steps has the Minister taken to ensure that there is a level playing field between the high street and online marketplaces? Will he meet me to discuss the matter further, with the British Toy & Hobby Association?

• 15 May 2025 · Product Regulation and Metrology Bill [Lords] (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. As somebody who has imported and exported products to and from Europe and the rest of the world for much of the last 40 years, and seen the regulations change much over the last 40 years, I believe it is sensible that we are aligned to our major markets. The hon. Member for West Worcestershire talked about that, and she is absolutely right. One of our major markets is right on our doorstep. We need to be aligned to it because it is much better for our businesses if our regulations—

• 15 May 2025 · Product Regulation and Metrology Bill [Lords] (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. It is a pleasure to speak in support of new clause 8, which seeks to level the playing field between online marketplaces and our bricks-and-mortar retailers. Online businesses have so many advantages in the marketplace, making it hard for our high streets to flourish against such competition. The new clause seeks to close those accountability gaps and ensure that consumers are properly protected and compensated when things go wrong. Crucially, it allows for the extension of liability to online marketplaces in the digital economy, where platforms such as Temu, TikTok Shop and Vinted are growing by more than 20% this year alone. That accountability is urgently needed. When unsafe products are sold online, the lines of responsibility are often blurred. A survey by Electrical Safety First found that 30% of consumers cannot distinguish between an online retailer and an online marketplace, and yet 70% trust these platforms to protect them from unsafe products. That example highlights the need for strong regulation of online marketplaces to bridge the gap between consumer awareness and product safety regulations. The provision would ensure that online intermediaries could not escape responsibility simply because they did not manufacture the product themselves. Platforms are not delivering the changes necessary to protect UK consumers, so measures must be placed on them to ensure that they are responsible for product safety requirements. Under the current system, Electrical Safety First recently identified 29 active listings for batteries that had been linked to serious incidents, despite an existing withdrawal notice. British consumers are put directly at risk of fires that can take their possessions, livelihoods and loved ones, and the existing enforcement regime cannot keep up. There needs to be accountability. It is not just electrical goods that pose a risk, but toys as well. The British Toy & Hobby Association has independently tested 650 toys bought through online marketplaces from third-party sellers during the last seven years. On average, it found around 90% of those toys to be non-compliant with UK regulations and standards, putting children at risk of choking, strangulation and electrocution. The new clause would also enable the disclosure of evidence in cases where someone seeks compensation for harm caused by a defective product. That is vital for consumers, who often lack resources and lack access to information held by large platforms or distributors. The online marketplace can feel like the wild west. It is time to bring the law up to speed and ensure that consumer protection is not left behind in the digital age. Consumers want assurances that they have legal redress and consumer protection if it is needed. If a product causes harm, someone must be responsible, and consumers must have a clear, realistic path to justice. The Government have indicated that liability will be addressed elsewhere. Can the Minister confirm what legislative vehicle will be used, and on what timeline? What mechanism do the Government anticipate using to address the liability of online marketplace providers? Could the Minister publish their plans before the next stage of the Bill? If the online marketplace regulations are to be made prior to addressing the position on liability, we need some analysis of what consequential changes might be required to those regulations. Are the Government considering that?

• 15 May 2025 · Product Regulation and Metrology Bill [Lords] (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I do agree that we should be exporting internationally.