Jess Brown-Fuller MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 9 Jul 2025 · LGBT Financial Recognition Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  I hear the Minister’s call loud and clear that the process will be slowed down if there is lots of ministerial correspondence to answer. Can I therefore ask him to provide a regular update from the MOD so that hon. Members on both sides of the House do not feel like they need to continually chase things up on behalf of their constituents?

• 9 Jul 2025 · LGBT Financial Recognition Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  The experience of my hon. Friend’s constituent reflects that of many others who feel abandoned and ignored. The MOD committed to updating applicants to the scheme within 18 weeks of their application, but that has not happened and has further deepened the emotional distress by reopening old wounds, as my hon. Friend said. I am very pleased, as I said before, that my constituent Liz is in the Public Gallery. Liz’s story mirrors that of so many affected by the policy. She was discharged from the RAF in 1969 after private letters between her and her girlfriend at the time were discovered. When her girlfriend failed to meet her one evening, Liz learned that she had been arrested by military police. Liz was then coerced into providing a statement, which led directly to her dismissal. She only discovered decades later when applying for this scheme that she had also been given a criminal conviction for same-sex sexual activity. That conviction has followed her unknowingly for her entire adult life and may have affected numerous aspects of it without her knowledge. Liz is one of the few who has received her compensation, which was fast-tracked due to health concerns. I am pleased to learn that both the dismissed and discharged scheme and the impact scheme are prioritising veterans over 80 and those with serious health conditions, but that will represent a large cohort. I move on to my questions for the Minister. According to Fighting With Pride, 84 payments have been made out of a total of more than 1,200 applications since the scheme went live in December. I had to get that information from Fighting With Pride because the MOD does not publish the number of successful applications on a rolling basis, which fuels mistrust. Will the Government confirm today how many veterans have received compensation in the dismissed or discharged scheme and the impact scheme, and what percentage of claimants that represents? Will the Minister commit to a simple weekly update? Even a tweet—is it still called a tweet?—would go a long way in rebuilding faith in the process. The DD scheme is currently managed by a very small number of civil servants. That scheme is for the larger sum of £50,000, and it deals with the simple question of whether the veteran was dismissed or discharged for their sexuality or perceived sexuality. Will the Minister increase the capacity to come to a decision on cases by increasing the number of civil servants working on the DD scheme so that it does not take the predicted five years to clear all the cases? I recognise that the impact scheme, which requires a decision by a panel chaired by Lord Paddick, deals with a far more complex area of impact payments that can be awarded up to the value of £20,000. The panel is sometimes presented with up to 600 pages of records for one veteran, and therefore the preparation time needed before a panel is extensive. The panel attempts to hear 10 cases per sitting, up from six at the start of the process. Will the Minister please give serious consideration to appointing a secondary panel with a secondary chair, as the most sitting days that the current panel can manage is two a week, with two days for preparation and reading? Now that the internal IT problems have apparently been resolved, will all veterans who have applied for either scheme be provided with an update 18 weeks after their application and every 18 weeks subsequently until a decision is reached, as the MOD previously promised? Will the information that will apparently be available on the portal be accessible to all, even those who are not tech savvy? Will the Government take the steps outlined to streamline the process of compensation, ensuring that the collection of military records is front-loaded when applications are received so that there is no delay in the claim being processed? Is the £75 million for reparations a ringfenced fund that will be extended if the number of applicants exceeds the fund? If so, where will the additional funding come from? I thank everyone who got in touch ahead of today’s debate, including Fighting With Pride, the Minister and all Members who came to share their constituents’ stories and show support for speeding up the scheme. We need to do better to ensure this dark period in our history has an ending that recognises the magnitude of the injustice faced by so many veterans. There is not a moment to lose.

• 9 Jul 2025 · LGBT Financial Recognition Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member raises an important point. There are constituents in every one of our constituencies who were wronged, and I am grateful to her for raising the plight of her constituents in this regard. She is right that we cannot wait any longer for justice to be served. I pay tribute to those individuals who will never see justice served; they will not see a penny of reparation or an apology from the state for their cruel treatment. They deserved better. The Etherton report is remarkable in its scope and sensitivity. The Government accepted all its recommendations, and the apologies that followed, the plans for memorials, and the returning of medals and caps would not have been possible without it. Today, we must focus on one of the most critical elements for veterans: financial reparations. Last December, the Government announced a £75 million compensation fund, with individual payments of up to £70,000 for LGBT veterans who were affected by the ban. The announcement was welcomed across the House as an acknowledgment, at last, of the scale of harm inflicted. However, I secured this debate because the implementation of the scheme has been woefully inadequate. The delivery has been painfully slow, and the communication from the Ministry of Defence has been appalling. That is not justice delivered. It is justice delayed, and as we all know, justice delayed is justice denied.

• 9 Jul 2025 · LGBT Financial Recognition Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to reflect on the fact that the policy that has been put in place means justice for those veterans. Today I will speak about the speed at which we actually see justice served for veterans who suffered wholly indefensible treatment. Nobody decides to go into the military lightly. It is a commitment to their country. As a result of the policy, many veterans lost not only their careers and pensions, but their medals, their reputations and in some cases they acquired criminal records without even being informed. Many had never disclosed their sexuality to friends or family and were then put in an impossible position of keeping the reason for their dismissal a secret, or having to share their sexuality. The consequences were profound. Veterans were left feeling humiliated and hounded out of service. Highly successful careers ended prematurely. Many found themselves suddenly without direction, with no time to prepare for civilian life. Many struggled to find new work. Some became homeless. Their future plans were torn to shreds, and they were left to rebuild their lives. The personal cost of that trauma is immeasurable: families were torn apart, livelihoods were destroyed and relationships were ruined.

• 9 Jul 2025 · LGBT Financial Recognition Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Gentleman raises an important point. Those LGBT veterans were welcome to fight for their country when they were needed, but this nonsensical policy was introduced only in the ’60s. For too many, the weight of the betrayal that they felt proved too heavy to bear. Tragically, some veterans committed suicide following their dismissal.

• 9 Jul 2025 · LGBT Financial Recognition Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  I appreciate the hon. Member’s intervention. He is absolutely right. I will come on to the fact that the scheme prioritises those who are over the age of 80 or have terminal diagnoses. That needs to be communicated to them so that they understand where their application is in the process. Some of these veterans, like the hon. Member’s constituent, have been waiting for 25 years since the ban was lifted. In some cases, they have been waiting up to 60 years for any form of recognition or redress. The charity Fighting With Pride estimates that, at the current rate, it could take five years to clear the existing backlog. That is wholly unacceptable, particularly given the age and health of many applicants. Time is not a luxury they can afford. From the accounts I have received from veterans, the process is riddled with obstacles. Many of them have received the non-financial reparations, such as returned medals, regimental caps or letters from the Prime Minister, only to be told that they must provide additional documentation, such as military records, to claim the financial compensation. I am fully aware that someone who applies for the non-financial reparations may choose not to subsequently apply for the financial reparations or may not qualify, but surely that process can be streamlined. We could frontload it: when someone applies for the non-financial redress, their military records could be requested in anticipation of a possible financial reparation. That would ease the burden on applicants and speed up the overall process. The Ministry’s communication has been woeful. Applicants were told to expect an update within 18 weeks. When those updates failed to materialise, many were left anxious and in the dark, fearing that their applications had been lost or rejected. For the hundreds of veterans who have waited years—decades—for justice, these delays are retraumatising. They are being forced to relive some of the most painful chapters of their lives, only to be met with silence from the very institution that wronged them.

• 9 Jul 2025 · LGBT Financial Recognition Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady is absolutely right. It is impossible to measure the scale of the impact on all those veterans, be it emotional, financial or in terms of the homes they ended up buying or places they ended up living. It is impossible to measure the effect exactly, but it was profound. Countless veterans were left with enduring feelings of shame and low self-esteem, as the Etherton report noted. These individuals had dedicated their lives to serving their country, only to realise, in the cruellest of ways, that the state had turned its back on them.

• 9 Jul 2025 · Early Years Providers: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  I hope that the Minister hears the message loud and clear from across the House that many service providers are flagging this to us in our constituencies. I send my concern to Rainbow nursery—another great name for a nursery. Fishbourne pre-school is just about covering wages and keeping the lights on, but there is nothing left over for the things that actually make early years special: the new books, the toys and the equipment to support those additional needs. Anything extra for the pre-school has to be raised by the parents via raffles or voluntary donations. The staff at Fishbourne pre-school were conscientious, engaged and passionate about the young people who they look after. I could tell that they valued every single one of them. I was really pleased to see that it had recently taken on a male member of staff, which goes back to earlier contributions from hon. Members. The nursery manager told me that it is brilliant to have a male presence in the nursery because so many of those children only see females in nursery settings. He is doing a marvellous job and I commend him for it. He was not in charge of the shaving foam. These professionals value every single one of the children they look after. Do the Government believe that they are valuing those professionals in the same way? The Department for Education itself has said that we will need 70,000 new childcare places and 35,000 additional staff by this autumn. Those already in the sector report feeling underpaid, overworked and under-recognised, despite the enormous responsibility that they hold looking after the most precious members of our families. If the Government are to recruit 35,000 more people into the early years sector, they need to make it an attractive career path. The new entitlements from September are meant to support all families, but the current design risks deepening inequality. The Institute for Fiscal Studies estimates that 80% of the families who will benefit earn over £45,000 a year. Just 20% are lower income families. That means that some of the children who would benefit most from early years intervention and education are the least likely to get it. I hope that the Minister is across that. My party has welcomed the Government’s commitment to increasing the frequency of Ofsted inspections for early years settings to keep children safe. As the hon. Member for Altrincham and Sale West (Mr Rand) mentioned, that is incredibly welcome, but there is concern that the numbers on the floor can be boosted the day before an Ofsted inspection. The tragic case of Gigi Meehan in Cheadle and the horrific abuse uncovered at Twickenham Green nursery are searing reminders of what can happen when safeguarding fails. Gigi’s parents, along with my hon. Friends the Members for Cheadle (Mr Morrison) and for Twickenham (Munira Wilson), have long campaigned for more regular and more robust inspections, as they are a vital part of raising standards and safeguarding children. Going back to supporting the workforce who are delivering this essential care, we need to invest in proper training, setting clear standards for oversight and ensuring that there is a meaningful career path for nursery staff. Requiring a recognised early years qualification and helping staff to access and complete that training is key to building a confident, skilled workforce and ensuring that every child receives the best possible start. So many Members across the House mentioned SEND; that skilled workforce can identify the additional support that a child may need as they move on towards school. I will briefly touch on the comments by the Chair of the Select Committee, the hon. Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), on maintained nurseries. I have a maintained nursery in my constituency, which is relaying the same concerns that she raised: it has the additional onus of employing a headteacher and operating like a school, but it cannot access the funding that schools can. The burden and pressure on its balance sheet are huge, and it is at risk of closing, but maintained nurseries have the greatest majority of SEND children. They are doing those early interventions and some incredible work. I was grateful to visit my local maintained nursery.

• 9 Jul 2025 · Early Years Providers: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend raises a valid and important point that has been made in various contributions to this debate. At the start of this week, I spent my morning at Fishbourne pre-school. It does not have a lovely name like the Bears or the Acorns—I am quite jealous, actually—but it is a brilliant, popular, charity-run pre-school that is doing everything it can to serve local families. I was covered in shaving foam the moment I walked through the door. There were activities, messy play and free play going on everywhere. We had a lovely “Wind the Bobbin Up” in the forest school, but I also took the opportunity to talk to the manager of the pre-school. She told me very plainly that, under the new arrangements, not only will their funding model be affected, but they will end up taking fewer children overall. The demand is there—they are already at capacity—but this change will mean that they can serve fewer families in the Fishbourne area. I think that is what my hon. Friend the Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) was alluding to: in those rural areas where there is not a huge amount of choice, and just one local service provider, if they can take on fewer children, where are the others meant to go?

• 9 Jul 2025 · Early Years Providers: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Sherwood Forest (Michelle Welsh) for securing this important and timely debate—I am sure she intended it to fall in the week when the Secretary of State announced the roll-out of Best Start centres. I also pay tribute to the hon. Lady for her ongoing advocacy for children, parents and early years providers up and down the country, often using her personal experiences to impress the importance of getting this right. Her commitment to the early years is noted across the House. She has also highlighted that early years providers span not just nurseries, but pre-schools, maintained nurseries, childminders, independent nurseries and in-school nurseries as well. Quality early years education is the single best investment that any Government can make in the future of our society. It supports children’s development at a critical stage of their lives and lays the groundwork for future educational attainment, wellbeing and opportunity. It also matters enormously for families. Flexible and affordable childcare is not just a convenience; it is a vital part of the country’s economic and social infrastructure. With the UK’s statutory parental pay among the lowest in the OECD, parents are often having to choose an early years provider earlier than they might like in order to return to work. The Government’s plans to expand the 30 hours free childcare entitlement have received broad support across the House, and rightly so. However, I would like to take this opportunity to ask the Minister whether the ambition will be matched with realism. Is he confident that the promise will be delivered? Many providers are already struggling to keep their doors open. In 2023, half of them reported that their income did not cover basic operating costs, and that is before factoring in the Government’s increases to national insurance contributions and the national living wage. In real terms, the average funding for three to four-year-olds is still below where it was in 2016. While the headlines about expanded entitlement sound impressive, and are no doubt welcome across the country, we have to ask whether it is enough to keep the sector afloat.

• 9 Jul 2025 · Early Years Providers: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend raises an important point that childminders are quite often the bedrock of early years provision. So often they are the experts, because they have a small cohort of children so they take the time to understand the needs of every single one of those children that they look after, and I praise them for it. I would like to briefly touch on the comments made by the Secretary of State for Education during her announcement on school readiness, about children needing to have the ability to sit still. I have two children in primary school. Before they started school, the fantastic nursery that they attended and their primary school were in absolute lockstep on what it means to be school ready. Can they put their own coat and shoes on independently? Can they go to the toilet unaided? Can they hold a pencil? Can they recognise their name if it is written out? There was no requirement for them to be able to sit still, especially in reception where so much of the foundation of their education is rooted in play, as the hon. Member for Sherwood Forest spoke about. I know that the Secretary of State is a mother, and I am sure that she recognises that it was a poorly phrased statement, so can the Minister reassure parents across the UK that play will continue to be the bedrock of early years teaching, and that it will continue throughout key stage 1? We were very pleased to see the Government’s recent announcements on Best Start hubs and early years workforce support. Those are welcome steps, and I know that a Best Start hub will be really welcomed in my constituency of Chichester. It is a real opportunity to ensure that families have access to all those support networks under one roof. I will close by asking the Minister a couple of questions. Will he tell us whether the Department will urgently review the funding rates to ensure that they reflect the true cost of delivering early years education, especially in the light of rising staffing and operational costs? Will the Government please consider exempting early years providers from the recent national insurance increase, given the unique pressures facing the sector? What steps are being taken to ensure that the roll-out in September does not leave providers short-staffed and under-resourced? How will the Department support those that are already warning that they may not be able to meet demand?

• 9 Jul 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q10. I will add to the many calls that the Prime Minister has already heard about the broken SEND system. I met headteachers and SEND co-ordinators in my constituency of Chichester last week. They all told me the same thing: the SEND system is broken. It is adversarial, parents are at breaking point, there are not enough spaces in specialist schools, and the education, health and care plan process is long, harrowing and often degrading. I know that the Government are exploring their options, but will the Prime Minister take on board the Liberal Democrats’ calls to introduce a national body for SEND, so that we can end the postcode lottery and fix the problem for good?

• 8 Jul 2025 · Down’s Syndrome Regression Disorder · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this important debate, and for her ongoing advocacy on behalf of people with Down’s syndrome and those with special educational needs. The hon. Lady was in the Chamber yesterday when the Secretary of State made her statement about Best Start centres, and her contribution was really valued across the House. Her commitment to raising these issues, both in Westminster Hall and in the main Chamber, does not go unnoticed, and the voices of the individuals and families she raises, who are too often overlooked, are heard loud and clear. I am grateful to Members from across the House for their contributions to this debate, and for shining a light on the often overlooked but deeply distressing reality of Down’s syndrome regression disorder, which is a little known but profoundly distressing condition that affects individuals when they are at a vulnerable point in their life, often during adolescence or early adulthood. As the hon. Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) said, it can be sudden and life altering for those with Down’s syndrome and for those who love them. This is not a rare curiosity that can be quietly ignored. It is a heartbreaking and complex condition that strips people of skills, independence and identity, often rapidly and with devastating consequences—and right now, families are being left to navigate it alone. Regression in this context is the sudden and unexplained loss of previously acquired developmental abilities, including speech, motor skills, self-care and social interaction. It is not autism or dementia—it is entirely different—and it is something that we must understand far better than we currently do. There is currently no single known cause for the regression, which can be triggered by significant life stresses, mental health deterioration, underlying medical issues, infections, nutritional deficiencies, exposure to toxins or, as the hon. Member for Thurrock spoke about, extreme moments of stress. She shared a heartbreaking story about the young person who had a heartbreaking moment in school and did not really recover from it. Despite its impact, frontline care staff have often never heard of the condition, and when symptoms emerge, diagnosis is often delayed or missed entirely. We need urgent investment in research to better understand the condition and develop evidence-based responses. It is a crisis of unmet need, because 80% of young people can make huge progress if it is caught and supported early enough. Families describe watching their loved ones retreat into silence, lose mobility or withdraw emotionally, often over just weeks or months. I do not have a child with Down’s syndrome, but I think it is the same for every parent—watching their child change in a way that is indescribable, losing all the things that make them who they are, must be the most distressing thing that they can go through. The impact must be devastating. These families need answers; they need access to specialist assessments, co-ordinated care and, above all, hope that with the right support, their loved one might regain some of what has been lost. Right now, there is no clinical consensus on treatment, no national guidance and very little research funding. In Chichester, my constituents are very lucky to have an incredible charity, the Chichester and Arun Down Syndrome Support Group, which works tirelessly to fill the gaps left by failings in public service provision. Ahead of this debate, the charity highlighted to me many of the challenges that their young people with Down’s syndrome face, particularly in accessing the support that they need throughout their education. Families have told me that, in hospital, when their Down’s syndrome child was born, they were presented with information from the Down’s syndrome group in Portsmouth, but were unable to access that service because they do not live there. Nationally, there needs to be support for every single child who is born. The Liberal Democrats are calling for three clear things. First, we would like regression disorder to be embedded in professional training for care workers, supported by new national standards set by a national care agency and a professional framework overseen by a royal college of care workers. The frontline workforce needs to be equipped to recognise and respond to the condition early and effectively. Secondly, we need the Down Syndrome Act to be properly resourced. That means far more than just warm words: it means access to speech and language therapy, occupational therapy, mental health support, physiotherapy and primary care. It means making good on the promise of joined-up, lifelong support, not just at school age but well into adulthood. Thirdly, we need real action on social care. We need bold, cross-party agreement on a long-term settlement now—not in a decade—and we must give unpaid family carers the deal that they deserve, with paid leave, guaranteed respite and long overdue recognition. Healthcare provision is also lagging. The NHS rightly recommends access to a wide range of specialists for people with Down’s syndrome, from physiotherapists and occupational therapists to speech and language support and mental healthcare, but too often families report waiting lists, postcode lotteries and providers that are simply not equipped to deal with complex needs such as regression. People with Down’s syndrome are often more likely to become seriously unwell from common infections such as flu and pneumonia, yet we are still not doing enough to ensure vaccine uptake. That is why we are calling for everyone with a disability or chronic health condition to have access to a named GP, to ensure early intervention, better diagnosis and ongoing support. Too many people with Down’s syndrome are being let down by the education system, the care system and the NHS. The regression that some experience in young adulthood is not inevitable; in many cases, it can be managed or even reversed with the right support, but that support needs to be in place for every young person. In my constituency I have seen the strength of local charities such as the Chichester and Arun Down Syndrome Support Group, and organisations such as Together Our Community, but we cannot continue to rely on charitable good will to cover the cracks left by a failing system. When a young person with Down’s syndrome starts to withdraw, lose speech or motor function or disconnect from their surroundings, their family do not need to be told to wait in a queue. They need a co-ordinated, knowledgeable and compassionate response, and they need it fast, so the question we must answer in this House today is simple: are we content to let families carry the burden alone, or are the Government ready to put in place the policies, funding and professional care that people with Down’s syndrome deserve? What steps will the Government take to drive forward research into Down’s syndrome regression disorder, get stronger training into the hands of those who need it, and guarantee that the joined-up care that people with Down’s syndrome so desperately deserve is finally delivered?

• 7 Jul 2025 · Giving Every Child the Best Start in Life · Hansard source

  More

  I sincerely thank the Secretary of State for today’s announcement, recognising that one-stop shops for advice and support should be available to every parent in every community. I am sure she will know that my local authority, West Sussex county council, currently does not receive Start for Life funding, so I am excited to see how this delivers for my constituents. I chair the all-party parliamentary group on infant feeding. Can the Secretary of State confirm that Best Start centres will be firmly rooted in evidence-based feeding support to ensure that all parents, regardless of how they choose to feed their babies, can access the guidance and help that they so desperately need?

• 7 Jul 2025 · Neighbourhood Policing · Hansard source

  More

  1. What steps she is taking to deliver effective community policing.

• 7 Jul 2025 · Neighbourhood Policing · Hansard source

  More

  Special constables play a vital role in visible community policing, but the number of specials dropped by over 700 between 2023 and 2024, and we lost one in four in the same period in my constituency of Chichester, which is represented by Sussex police. Will the Home Secretary consider practical incentives such as council tax relief or free local travel, like those that the Met police currently have, to support recruitment and retention of those specials?

• 1 Jul 2025 · Parental Leave Review · Hansard source

  More

  A key barrier for many women returning to the workplace after starting a family is the challenge of balancing work with feeding their child. There is a lack of facilities in many workplaces, with no provision for expressing or storing breast milk. Will the review consider improving provisions for breastfeeding parents and the need for individuals to be given breaks to do so?

• 1 Jul 2025 · Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Lauren, from my constituency, is a bright and determined 16-year-old young woman, who has just completed her GCSEs and came to do work experience in my office. She has cerebral palsy and is applying for PIP not because she wants a handout, but because she knows that she will need support to live independently and pursue a career and life ambitions that will probably bring her to this place at some point, if she gets her way. Does the hon. Member agree that young disabled people deserve clarity and dignity, and that this Bill is not giving them that?

• 1 Jul 2025 · Infant Feeding · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to bring this Adjournment debate to the Chamber on a topic close to my heart. I refer hon. Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as the Chair of the all-party parliamentary group for infant feeding. I am pleased as always to see the Minister in her place. I look forward to her response on behalf of the Government just days before the long awaited 10-year plan for the NHS. When the Secretary of State for Health promised to create the “healthiest generation ever”, it was a bold and admirable ambition, and certainly one that I share with him. Every child deserves the opportunity to thrive regardless of their wealth or their postcode. When the Government talk of building a better future for children, their policies and schemes often start with school—with free school meals and breakfast clubs—or providing Government support for nurseries and early years settings, but there is little substance in the critical years from birth to three, and even less when it comes to policy around infant feeding, whether that is breastfeeding, formula feeding or a combination of the two. I had my son nearly 11 years ago, and I remember with fondness the lactation consultant coming on to the ward in the maternity unit and showing me how best to hold my son to feed him and what to expect in the first few weeks after taking him home. I did not have an easy journey with breastfeeding: I suffered with pain when he latched, I had multiple bouts of mastitis and swelling—the list went on. My husband and I ran our own restaurant at the time, so he took approximately three hours of paternity leave before returning to work.

• 1 Jul 2025 · Infant Feeding · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. He is right that Northern Ireland scored the highest in the report card format on the World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative, which I will come to. In comparison, England scored a paltry less than 50, which was very much due to scoring zero on infant feeding and HIV.

• 1 Jul 2025 · Infant Feeding · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman highlights how important it is to have that community-based support in an area. Unfortunately, not every mother across the UK can say the same. There are areas where they have to travel up to an hour by car to attend that sort of group, and I will come on to that point. When I had my daughter, five years after my son, the support that I had relied on had all but vanished. The Milk group was now being run out of, in effect, a broom cupboard at my local leisure centre, with no opportunity to socialise with other mums. Only six months later, the pandemic hit and my daughter’s health visitor reviews were done via Zoom, often without my daughter even on the screen. The local children and family centre in my constituency never reopened in the same way after the pandemic. I was one of the lucky ones because I had already built my village around me five years earlier and I had a network of friends and family that I could call on. However, for those who have become new mothers in the last decade, that support has been all but vaporised, with community support groups patchy and often delivered by volunteers or those wonderful midwives in their time off. It is essential to acknowledge and support those parents who cannot or choose not to breastfeed, to ensure that they feel empowered and confident in the decisions they make for their children’s nutrition and wellbeing. I am a proud advocate of every parent having choice, but that choice should be an informed one. Currently, it is not a level playing field, with formula companies preying on the vulnerability of parents. The Competition and Markets Authority launched a market study into the formula industry in February 2024 and published its results earlier this year. The study provided a comprehensive, in-depth and up-to-date exploration of the infant formula market in the UK through a consultative process that has offered unique insights into the industry. A short extract from the CMA’s overview of its findings states: “parents are often in vulnerable circumstances when they first make choices about whether and which infant formula to use, their brand choice is often based on incomplete or unclear information, and they are typically then reluctant to switch brands. Against this backdrop, manufacturers place significant emphasis on building their brands—including through their willingness to supply the NHS below cost—and differentiating their products to attract parents, rather than competing strongly on price. And price competition between retailers has typically been weak…Our analysis indicates that these features, in combination, are leading to poor outcomes for parents in terms of the choices they make and prices they pay for infant formula.” In short, a vulnerable, extremely tired new parent is making choices on which formula to buy, but the claims on boxes of commercial infant formula are often unfounded. Parents have to choose between a £7 tin of formula and a £14 tin of formula, even though they are nutritionally equivalent. At a recent event, we heard the testimony of parents who had purchased the more expensive brand with the bold claims on its packaging, believing that they were doing the best for their child, only to then use fewer scoops when making a bottle to make the tin last longer. We have only to look at our supermarket shelves and see the formula milk locked in glass cabinets to understand that we have a crisis in families being able to feed their babies. The cost of living challenges have spiralled into a food insecurity crisis, yet formula manufacturers increased prices by 24% in one year in 2023 and prices continue to rise well beyond inflation. Research shows that parents rarely switch brands once they have introduced a formula milk. This gives formula companies a clear incentive to offer their products to maternity wards at reduced prices, knowing that parents are likely to continue using the same brand when they go home. To address this, the CMA recommends standardised infant formula labelling in healthcare settings, which would eliminate this form of exploitative marketing. Formula companies are also restricted from advertising newborn formula, but they get round this by advertising their follow-on, or stage 2, milk and making the packaging look exactly the same. The CMA recommendations ask for the Government to assess whether infant formula and follow-on milks are “clearly distinct”, then communicate that assessment to the manufacturers and enforcers. A Mintel report from 2016 reported that in 2015, for every baby born in the UK, companies spent a staggering £21 just on marketing follow-on formula. The CMA has made 11 recommendations to the Government, all of which aim to improve outcomes for parents. I am calling on the Government today to implement all 11 recommendations and finally to level the playing field for those parents who rely on formula to feed their babies. This debate is timely, as last week I was delighted to host the World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative’s launch of its 2024 report here in Parliament. I would be delighted to give the Minister a copy if she does not already have one. The key takeaway from the report is that the UK has one of the lowest breastfeeding rates in the world. The report not only highlights the gaps in policy but creates a report card system for each of the four nations. I want to highlight a few things that were mentioned in the report. Importantly, data—though its collection is uneven across the four nations—shows that the majority of mothers do set out to breastfeed. Despite this, by six to eight weeks, around 70% of babies in the UK receive some formula, and by six months only 1% of babies are exclusively breastfed.

• 1 Jul 2025 · Infant Feeding · Hansard source

  More

  It is as if the hon. Member has lifted my words directly off the page in a timely manner. The reason I managed to carry on was that I attended a peer support group in my local church hall every Monday morning, aptly called Milk. It was not about the professional support that I had while I was there—although that was great, and I give a shout-out to the wonderful Julie who supported all the mums—it was meeting the other mums who were going through the same things and the ability to ask each other questions and offer advice, as well as the amazing trained peer supporters, who were volunteers. I give a quick shout-out to Holly, who showed us that we could and would survive those difficult first few months and come out the other side, just like she had.

• 1 Jul 2025 · Infant Feeding · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister highlights some brilliant examples that are a gold standard in care, but does she recognise that the process the Government are currently undertaking, with only half of local authorities being funded, means that we still end up with a patchwork level of support for new mothers? They do not know where they are meant to go, because it is different when they cross a county border.

• 1 Jul 2025 · Infant Feeding · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right to say that these women have often been embedded in their communities for many years, helping women to raise their babies, and that they go on to do marvellous things in the community. The majority of those who stop breastfeeding early wanted to breastfeed for longer, but did not receive the help they needed to resolve problems, all of which could be addressed with support from trained health workers, skilled peer supporters or specialist help in hospital, at home or in the community. The World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative report highlights the absence of national policy and governance in England. The devolved nations have pulled ahead on this front, with Scotland publishing a strategic framework, Wales having had an action plan since 2019 and Northern Ireland currently finalising its strategy. Support needs to be baked into policy and legislation because communities cannot do this alone. It being so early in this Parliament, the Government have all the opportunities to act. I was delighted to see today’s announcement of a review of the parental leave and pay system, and I hope that infant feeding will play into the considerations of better support for parents on maternity and paternity leave. Health visitor teams have also dwindled over recent years, and an estimated 54,000 GP appointments could be saved every year if a professional feeding service was available in every community. Any strategy must be properly funded and integrated with current programmes across communities and healthcare settings, such as family hubs and Start for Life, which should themselves be expanded, particularly Start for Life, which is funded only in half of England’s local authorities. Some councils are choosing to make this an area to improve on, and I am pleased to see my local authority—West Sussex county council—include the early years as part of its health strategy for the next five years, even without the Start for Life funding, which it does not receive. I would like to use an example of a mother who got in touch just last week to share her story. She had a traumatic birth with unexpected interventions. Her baby was quickly fed formula by hospital staff. The pump kit did not work in the hospital, and no meaningful help was available. She wants to feed her baby herself. She looked online when she got home to find help nearby, but there was nothing less than an hour away by car. She is struggling with which formula to use and does not understand the differences between them. She does not know other women with babies. She is feeling lost and isolated. Social media is full of conflicting advice, so she has gone out of the area for paid support, which she cannot afford on maternity pay, to help her try to regain a sense of reality. I am sure this lady’s story is the same for parents across the country. If the reasons I have highlighted are not compelling enough, maybe the economic impact is. UK research back in 2012 on the costs of four diseases showed that even reaching moderate breastfeeding levels could save the NHS millions, and that the implementation of proven breastfeeding support systems would pay for itself within a year. For babies, breastfeeding strengthens the immune system and significantly reduces the risk of infections, obesity, asthma and long-term conditions, such as type 2 diabetes. For the mother, breastfeeding lowers the risk of breast and ovarian cancers and cardiovascular disease, and supports post-natal mental health. I could say much more, but instead I will move to my asks of this Government. When will the Government make their decision on whether they will accept the 11 recommendations from the Competition and Markets Authority? Will the Minister consider following the devolved nations and introduce a comprehensive national infant feeding strategy to end the postcode lottery and provide support to all parents in their feeding journeys? Can we expect to see something about infant feeding in the upcoming NHS 10-year plan? Finally, there is little about breastfeeding in most health professionals training, but primary care has successfully integrated assisted roles into services such as pharmacists and social prescribers. Could the same model be extended to lactation consultants? I would like to finish by thanking all those tireless activists and campaigners who have been fighting for all women to have support, guidance and trusted information when they begin motherhood. I will not risk trying to name them all as I will no doubt miss some, but a special thank you goes to the World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative steering group, First Steps Nutrition Trust and the former hon. Member for Glasgow Central who chaired the APPG before the general election.

• 1 Jul 2025 · Infant Feeding · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for her intervention. I was so pleased to hear the statement in the House earlier today. I know that she has been a tireless advocate for making sure that parental leave for all parents is improved dramatically. I thank her for her advocacy in that area.