Jess Brown-Fuller MP: speeches

Speeches

• 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.

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

  More

  My constituent Liz was thrown out of the RAF in 1969 when a love letter from her girlfriend was discovered. Not only did she lose her career but, as she recently discovered, she has had a criminal record for 50 years. The compensation scheme for veterans has been open since December last year, but the discharge of funds for those suffering such injustice is slow: 1,000 veterans have applied, but only 44 payments have been realised. Will the Leader of the House please make time for a debate about the process, so that those who have waited for decades can finally be compensated?

• 25 Jun 2025 · Department for Transport · Hansard source

  More

  My constituents in Chichester are beyond frustrated by the congestion on our A road, the A27. A bypass was originally included in the road investment strategy pipeline covering 2025 to 2030, but that has since been deferred to 2030 to 2035, with no guaranteed funding. Does the hon. Member agree that strategic investment in key arterial roads is vital not only to unlocking economic growth but to easing the daily pressures on communities such as mine and across the country?

• 25 Jun 2025 · GP Funding: South-west England · Hansard source

  More

  I am sure the Minister will talk about the hub and spoke model that the Government are championing, but my hon. Friend is right about the difficulties in rural areas especially. Many constituents have talked to me about the distance they are having to travel to get basic medication that means they can function, go to work the next day or get their children to school. This is why we have been calling for a fairer and more sustainable long-term funding model for community pharmacies. They play a vital role in relieving pressure on GPs, yet they are being squeezed out of existence. Since 2017, 1,200 pharmacies have shut their doors. Community Pharmacy England has warned of real-terms funding cuts of at least 25% since 2015, leaving the network on the brink of collapse. This is not just a failing system; it is a broken one. This Labour Government have a responsibility to act. They were elected on a promise of change, but that change must begin with fixing our NHS. I am sure the Minister will celebrate the budget increase, but as my hon. Friend the Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew) said, this has been swallowed by the increased costs and national insurance contributions. That is why the Liberal Democrats tabled an amendment to exempt healthcare services from the NICs rise, which the Government chose not to accept. General practice is the front door to our health system. If we do not invest properly in GP services, everything else suffers. We must not let that door remain closed to so many. As my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Abbot rightly said, we do not have to accept broken systems—we can fix them, and now is the time to prove that we will. Will the Minister commit to the Liberal Democrat proposal of a legal right for patients to see a GP within seven days, or within 24 hours in urgent cases? Does he agree that everyone over 70 and those with long-term health conditions should have access to a named GP?

• 4 Jun 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q6. Sir Jon Cunliffe’s interim report, published yesterday, laid out the fundamental changes needed for our water sector. That is felt no more acutely than in my constituency of Chichester. We have a harbour that is in an unfavourable, declining condition and sewage is blighting our tourism industry. With water bills from Southern Water rising by 47% for my constituents, can the Prime Minister tell them when they can expect to see the real change that this Government promised and our waterways cleaned up for good?

• 4 Jun 2025 · Business Rates Relief: High-street Businesses · Hansard source

  More

  I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will join me in congratulating Robin’s Nest coffee shop in my constituency, which has just celebrated its first birthday. In the year that the shop has been open, its owners have seen their business rates double, and they have written to me to say that they might not make it to their second birthday. Does he agree that business rate reform cannot come soon enough and that it would be a crying shame to lose such high street businesses?

• 21 May 2025 · Business and the Economy · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member makes a great point. I was contacted by Yoddi, who owns La Fish in my constituency of Chichester. He says that the rise in national insurance contributions will cost him £1,200 a month that he now has to find. He has two choices, one of which is passing on that cost to consumers. We already know that the price of fish and chips has risen exponentially over the years and the cost of living pressures continue to make that worse. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that small businesses like that one are at risk from the Government’s NICs rises?

• 15 May 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Secretary of State accept my warm invitation to visit my constituency and sit in traffic with me so she can experience what my constituents experience morning, noon and night on the A27, which is strangling economic growth in the area and preventing investment?

• 15 May 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  There has been real interest in Westminster Hall debates on maternity services and the recently announced closure of the maternity service and special baby care unit at Yeovil hospital. Will the Leader of the House commit to time in the Chamber to debate the failure to implement in full the Ockenden recommendations that would see the improved maternity care we need across the UK?

• 13 May 2025 · Local Housing Need Assessment Reform · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Hobhouse, for the first time, I think. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne) on securing this vital debate. My constituency of Chichester has been grappling with serious housing challenges, which have been continually worsened by a deeply flawed planning process. The demand for social housing vastly outstrips supply. Private rentals are prohibitively expensive, and sky-rocketing house prices have made home ownership increasingly out of reach for those who have grown up in my constituency. Housing developments should enhance our communities, delivering affordable, sustainable homes alongside essential infrastructure, but the current approach does the opposite. The standard method for assessing housing need imposes arbitrary national targets on local authorities, which ignore the specific needs and constraints of each area. It fails to deliver genuinely affordable homes and does little to reflect local demand or geography. As my hon. Friend highlighted, the standard method fails to address above-inflation house price rises. Our average house price in Chichester, according to the Office for National Statistics, is £454,000. In just one year, to February 2025, the price of a semi-detached house in Chichester rose by 8.1%, yet Chichester has seen huge-scale development in recent years. Meanwhile, the average salary in my constituency is under £30,000, which is below the UK median. When new homes are delivered, they often enter the market at prices higher than the local median, as the right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds) mentioned. That artificially inflates the affordability ratio, which then increases future housing targets, creating a vicious cycle that drives prices even further out of reach. It does nothing to address the real challenges that my constituents face in getting on the housing ladder. Instead, it leaves new developments affordable only to those who are moving into the area, not those already living there. At the same time, councils face an uphill battle in trying to ensure that developments, required by the same standard method, include adequate levels of social and affordable housing. At present, we have over 2,000 families on the wait list for social homes in Chichester. Any development of 11 homes or more is expected to provide at least 10% as affordable housing. Both Chichester and Arun district councils, which sit within my constituency, request 30% social and affordable housing in their local plans to address some of the unmet need locally, but those targets are continuously undermined by viability assessments submitted by the developers, because of the high land prices in our constituency. A recent example is a 2,200 home development to the west of Bersted, approved by Arun district council on the basis that it was included in the Conservative local plan from 2022. There is strong opposition in the community to the proposal, not only because those homes will add to the strain on local infrastructure, but because only 10% of those homes will be “affordable”. The very definition of affordable is fundamentally flawed when even 80% of unaffordable is still unaffordable for so many people. The developer claimed that a higher proportion of social and affordable homes on the site would have made the project commercially unviable, so the council was left with no power to enforce its requested levels of social and affordable houses. That is why I was pleased that my hon. Friend the Member for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos) tabled an amendment to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, calling on the Government to adopt a separate social housing target. I am sure that would be welcomed by local authorities up and down the UK, because they are best placed to know what their communities need, not the developers that are trying to build in them. The standard method also fundamentally fails to consider any geographical constraints, which ties the hands of councils during land allocation. In my area, 70% of Chichester district is covered by national park, with an additional 5% designated as national landscape at Chichester harbour. That means that our ambitious housing target, which has doubled under the Labour Government, must be met within just 25% of available land, yet the housing target remains unadjusted. We need a method for assessing local housing that actually works for communities—one that recognises local constraints, delivers genuinely affordable housing, protects the national landscape and ensures that every development contributes positively to the places that we call home. This will not change until the top-down approach of the standard method for assessing local housing need is reformed to genuinely reflect community need, and until local authorities are given the power to challenge and regulate developers effectively. I beg the Minister to look again at the standard method so that we can truly address the local housing need for areas such as mine in Chichester.

• 12 May 2025 · Draft Medical Devices and Blood Safety and Quality (Fees Amendment) Regulations · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for her speech. As she says, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency is a world-class regulator that should be innovative, transparent and truly independent, while maintaining high standards and always putting public health first. In recent years, however, confidence in MHRA standards has been undermined by the Primodos, vaginal mesh and infected blood scandals. It is crucial that we ensure that those mistakes are never repeated, and that the MHRA regains the public’s trust. The MHRA has suffered from insufficient staffing levels and inflexibility around funding and resourcing, and patients are the ones paying the price. The Government should aim for nothing less than halving the time in which new treatments reach patients for life-threatening conditions such as cancer. The Liberal Democrats therefore support additional resource for the MHRA, but that must go hand in hand with greater capacity and a stronger service to address past failings. Can the Minister confirm that when the regulations are made, we will see an increase in the speed at which patients receive treatments? Can she tell us when that improvement will be delivered? Concerns were expressed during the consultation that fee hikes, some of which exceed inflation, will stifle innovation and undermine important research. What assurances can the Minister provide that there will be no deterioration in the number or quality of new products? Is she confident that payment waivers and easement measures are sufficient to stop small and medium-sized enterprises significantly cutting back their activity?

• 29 Apr 2025 · Black Maternal Health Awareness Week · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the hon. Member for Clapham and Brixton Hill (Bell Ribeiro-Addy) on securing today’s important and timely debate, following Black Maternal Health Awareness Week earlier this month. Her opening remarks were comprehensive and thoughtful. I am always pleased to hear from the hon. Member for Sherwood Forest (Michelle Welsh), who is a passionate advocate for improved maternity services in Nottingham and across the UK; I am pleased to serve on the APPG with her at the helm. Women are at their most vulnerable during pregnancy, as they carry another human life, and they deserve the very best care. They have more touchpoints with the NHS than they will have for most of their lives. We engage with the NHS when we are born and when we need to access care at the end of our lives. When we are carrying a child, we have more moments in front of medical professionals than for the majority of our lives. Following its inspection of 131 maternity units, the Care Quality Commission found that 65% were not safe for women to give birth, 47% required improvement on safety, and 18% were inadequate. The commission warned that it is concerned about the potential normalising of serious harm in maternity care. Those risks are particularly stark for women of colour in this country, for whom pregnancy continues to carry an unacceptable level of danger. As the Darzi report highlighted, black women are almost three times as likely as white women to die during childbirth, while neonatal mortality among the most deprived quintile is more than double that among the least deprived. That is nothing less than a national scandal. Maternity care is an issue close to my heart, having had two very different experiences giving birth in my local hospital in Chichester. I tabled an early-day motion on maternity care and secured a Backbench Business debate in this Chamber on that subject just two months ago. Like the hon. Member for Sherwood Forest, I am in regular contact with Donna Ockenden, who produced the Ockenden report. Her findings, along with those of Dr Bill Kirkup, show that the problems identified at the Shrewsbury and Telford trust and the East Kent trust are not isolated incidents. The same issues are systemic and widespread across many NHS trusts up and down the country. In preparation for the previous debate on maternity services as a whole, I spoke to families across the country who had experienced devastating failures in the system. They went into hospital expecting the joyful outcome of going home with a child, but instead they had to return without their baby, carrying the trauma of that experience for the rest of their lives. As the hon. Member for Clapham and Brixton Hill mentioned, the MBRRACE-UK report for 2021 to 2023 confirms that inequalities in maternal mortality rates persist, with a nearly threefold difference among women from black ethnic backgrounds, and an almost twofold difference among women from Asian ethnic backgrounds, compared with white women. Women living in the most deprived areas continue to experience maternal mortality rates that are twice those in the least deprived areas. Care for black women who experience stillbirth or neonatal death is often inadequate. Ethnicity is still not routinely recognised as a risk factor in, for example, the screening and prevention of conditions such as gestational diabetes. Births to black mothers are almost twice as likely to be investigated for NHS safety failings, and black mothers are twice as likely to suffer from perinatal mental illness compared with their white counterparts. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson), who has long talked about these disparities. She introduced the Miscarriage and Stillbirth (Black and Asian Women) Bill in 2022, which sought to require the Secretary of State to lay annual reports before Parliament on efforts to reduce miscarriage and stillbirth rates among black and Asian women, but unfortunately it was not carried over into the next Session. When so many of our conversations in this House and in the other place are about the economic pressure we are under as a country, it is worth reflecting that, on top of the enormous human toll of this issue, failure also has a financial cost. Obstetric claims make up just 13% of clinical negligence cases handled by NHS Resolution, but they cost more than £1 billion a year, which is nearly 60% of the total cost. Across the country, families face unbearable grief and trauma because of failures in maternity care, and that burden is falling disproportionately on black women and families. We Liberal Democrats are committed to transforming maternity services to make the UK the safest place in the world to have a baby, and we fully support the work of Black Maternal Health Awareness Week in drawing attention to these critical issues. Our general election manifesto pledged to revolutionise perinatal mental health support, not only for those currently pregnant and for new mothers but for those who have endured miscarriage or stillbirth. We have been clear that the Government must, as a priority of the highest urgency, implement all the immediate and essential actions recommended by the Ockenden report. It is deeply concerning that, years after the tragedies at the Shrewsbury and Telford trust and the East Kent trust, failures are still widespread and efforts to address them appear piecemeal. When my hon. Friend the Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan) recently questioned the Department on the implementation of the Ockenden recommendations, it was alarming that it could not confirm whether the actions had been implemented, nor did it appear to have a system for centrally monitoring the progress. The Minister pointed to the three-year delivery plan for maternity and neonatal services as the Department’s main response. Deeper analysis shows serious shortcomings. Many measures in the plan have no meaningful numerical targets, which makes real accountability for the difference made by the plan very hard to track. Targets for expanding access to perinatal mental health support are being missed, even as some improvement is noted, and staff satisfaction indicators remain worryingly low, with some measures still recording fewer than half of staff expressing confidence in educational opportunities or in their management’s response to unsafe practices. The target set in 2010 to halve maternal mortality looks increasingly out of reach. Maternal mortality rates did not fall for a decade, and they actually increased between 2021 and 2023. Worse still, no updated data has been published for the last two years on the rates of serious brain injury, stillbirth, neonatal mortality or preterm birth. Without transparency and accountability, women will continue to be failed, and black women, who already bear the brunt of the disparities, will continue to be disproportionately harmed. That is why I ask the Minister to commit to reviewing these issues urgently, to meet me and my colleagues from the Liberal Democrat health team to discuss a more effective plan to improve maternity safety, and to set out a clear path to address the deep disparities in black maternal health. Alongside that, the Liberal Democrats are calling for a cross-Government strategy, led by the Department of Health and Social Care, with annual progress reports on reducing miscarriage and stillbirth rates among ethnic minorities. We also call for increased funding for public health initiatives, with a portion earmarked to allow communities facing the worst health inequalities to co-produce solutions tailored to their specific needs. We propose the establishment of a health creation unit in the Cabinet Office to lead work across Government to improve health and tackle inequalities. Black women have waited too long for their concerns to be heard, for the system to change and for justice to be done. We owe it to them and to every woman, family and baby in this country to get maternity services right. No woman should fear for her life or her child’s life because of the colour of her skin or the postcode that she lives in. We have to do better.

• 2 Apr 2025 · Whiplash Injury Compensation · Hansard source

  More

  The changes today are simple: the compensation tariffs for pain, suffering and loss of amenity in whiplash claims are being uplifted by approximately 15% to reflect inflation since the original 2021 figures were set, with a buffer to account for future inflation. These updates are welcome, but also present us with an opportunity to reflect on the broader balance we strike between tackling fraud and protecting the rights of those with legitimate injuries. Whiplash has long been a contentious area of UK personal injury law. We have one of the highest rates of whiplash claims in the world, which has undoubtedly contributed to the rise in motor insurance costs, and whiplash claims have historically added billions of pounds to insurance costs. In my constituency of Chichester, the picture is particularly concerning. According to a study by the Driving Instructors Association, Chichester is now the most accident-prone city in the UK, reporting 232 accidents per 100,000 residents, which is 54% higher than the national average. Even more alarmingly, Chichester has the highest fatality rate of any city, at 5.6 fatal accidents per 100,000 residents. These are not just statistics; they are lives lost and families changed forever. That underlines the real-world impact of road safety and why fair, accessible compensation for those injured on our roads is vital. The 2021 reforms that introduced fixed tariffs and mandatory medical assessments have had an impact, and the number of whiplash claims has declined, but whiplash still accounts for a large share of personal injury claims, and the need to ensure fairness in the system remains. We must remember that behind every claim is a person, often in pain, unable to work, potentially scared to go back out on the roads and navigating an unfamiliar legal system. For them, the process must be simple, fair and accessible. Victims should never be discouraged from seeking rightful compensation because of excessive bureaucracy or overly rigid procedures. That is why the Liberal Democrats have consistently advocated for a balanced approach. During debate on the Civil Liability Act 2018, my colleagues in the other place, Lord Sharkey and Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames, worked hard to push for stronger safeguards. They argued that the definition of “whiplash injury” should be written into primary legislation to allow full parliamentary scrutiny, and they pushed for compensation to be based on Judicial College guidelines, not simply on fixed tariffs, to preserve judicial discretion and to reflect the severity of injuries. They also urged the previous Government to ensure that any savings made from reducing fraudulent claims are passed on to consumers through lower insurance premiums—a promise that the insurance industry has been slow to honour and which is certainly not reflected in the consumer experience. We also look forward to the findings of the review on whether those savings have been delivered to customers. We continue to support a system that is firm on fraud but fair to victims. Yes, we need robust safeguards, such as mandatory medical assessments and closer co-ordination between regulators, insurers and law enforcement to root out dishonest claims, but that must not come at the expense of those with genuine injuries. It is critical that review mechanisms are in place not just to track inflation, but to assess whether the tariff system continues to serve justice. We believe that the Government must do more to simplify the claims process, particularly for those who do not have or cannot access legal representation. The updated tariff is a necessary correction for inflation, but it must not be seen as the end of the matter. The long-term success of the system depends on three things: maintaining fairness for claimants, preserving judicial discretion where needed and ensuring that promised savings are felt by customers. We must remain focused on people, not just on policy.

• 24 Mar 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  My constituents and I know how lucky we are to live in such a beautiful part of the United Kingdom. We need to see growth so that our young people can stay in their local communities, buy homes in the areas in which they have grown up, and continue to contribute to the local economy and keep Chichester thriving for generations to come; but the reality is that the planning system in my little patch of the country is not fit for purpose. With the district council’s footprint covering 70% of national park and 5% of national landscape, the ambitious total for housing allocation in our area is confined to just 25% of the available land in a ribbon that is causing coastal squeeze. This has led to high-density developments built without adequate infrastructure, leaving my residents facing daily challenges navigating the horrendous congestion on the A27, finding local school places for their children, or simply obtaining an appointment with a GP. The current system has left my communities frustrated, my local businesses unable to grow, and local councils tied up in red tape, unable to plan. Housing developers have a duty to create communities, not just buildings, but the very nature of the current planning system means that developers are putting forward proposals that look only at the patches that they are trying to develop rather than the wider picture surrounding it, and the councillors who are elected to represent their areas are fighting with their hands tied behind their backs. In both Chichester and Arun district councils, an application may be refused by the planning committees—perhaps owing to flooding risks, loss of grade 1 agricultural land or inadequate infrastructure in the area—only for that to be overturned at appeal, which is a costly, time-consuming process, taking planners out of the departments where they are trying to plan. The previous administration in Chichester district council allowed the local plan to expire, which left developers riding roughshod over areas on the Manhood peninsula, a low-lying coastal plain that is susceptible to extreme flooding which seems to be getting worse and worse. The new administration in 2023 focused on producing a robust local plan, which has now been through inspection—to the relief of communities across Chichester—and protects areas such as the Manhood peninsula while prioritising brownfield development, which all of us, on both sides of the House, agree should be the priority for planning. However, the Government’s ambitious new housing target could force the council back to square one and put all the power back into the hands of developers, because we are being asked to increase our housing target by nearly 100%. We do not have a planning crisis; we have a building crisis. Developers are land-banking consents rather than getting on with delivering the homes that we need, because demand drives up prices. Since 2007, more than 1.4 million homes given fully consented permissions have not been built. The Bill does not tackle the workforce issues or the supply chain issues, and it also does not acknowledge that water companies, which are responsible for vital infrastructure to ensure that that their reliance on storm overflows can reduce over time, are not consulted over individual planning applications because they are not statutory consultees. As the Minister knows, I have called for such consultation in other debates. Finally, there is no target for social homes in the Bill. Registered providers in Chichester are currently refusing to take on the social homes on smaller mixed-use sites, favouring the larger developments and prioritising upgrading their existing housing stock, which is putting the viability of social homes in my area at serious risk—and they are homes that we are desperately crying out for.

• 19 Mar 2025 · National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member mentions small businesses. Local hairdressers in my constituency have been in touch with me to say that given the difficult economic picture, these NICs rises will mean that they cannot take on apprentices this year. Does he agree that this NICs rise is a tax not just on business, but on education?

• 25 Feb 2025 · Maternity Services · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered maternity services. It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Christopher. I thank all the Members in attendance for their interest in this important topic and the Backbench Business Committee for allocating time to debate maternity services in England. On average, a baby is born in England every 56 seconds, over 1,500 babies each day, most of them delivered in an NHS setting with the help and support of a maternity department or at home with an NHS community midwife by their side. That is over 500,000 babies every year. I contributed to that statistic in 2014 and 2019 when I gave birth to my children at St Richard’s hospital in Chichester. Two very different births that I will not spend my valuable time in this debate reflecting on, because there are far more important voices that need to be heard and considered. A person is at their most vulnerable moment when they or their partner go into labour. We put our health, safety, and the safety of our unborn child into the hands of professionals who work in that setting—the midwives, obstetricians, anaesthetists, and neonatologists—to support us in the safe delivery of our child and get us all home safe. And in the majority of births that is the case. However, several investigations have revealed fundamental flaws in how maternity care is delivered across England. A Care Quality Commission inspection of 131 maternity units found that 65% were not safe for women to give birth in, with studies showing that one fifth of all causes of stillbirth are potentially preventable. The Ockenden report, led by Donna Ockenden, investigated the maternity services at the Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, but it also highlighted the flaws in maternity care across England. The report laid out immediate and essential actions which are key to reforming maternity services and ensuring that every mother and baby receive the care they deserve and should expect. In her report Donna reflected that sometimes that spotlight can feel harsh to staff on the front line, who are doing their very best in what are often extremely challenging circumstances. In conversation with midwives and others working in the maternity care sector, I recognise that each one I spoke to entered the profession as a the result of a calling, vocation, or passion for supporting mothers to bring their babies into the world. They are frontline NHS staff who often go above and beyond the call of duty to support and care for their patients in those extraordinary hours and days. Midwives in particular spend significant time with expectant mothers, supporting them through all stages of pregnancy and birth. They see women at their most vulnerable. They act as therapists, teachers, friends and maternal figures. Yet across the country, staffing levels are inadequate. In 2023, midwives and support workers worked over 100,000 hours of unpaid overtime every week. The pressure and stress on them is immense and this leads to burnout, absenteeism, high staff turnover and the loss of experienced professionals from the field, and that ultimately puts patient safety at risk.

• 18 Dec 2024 · Creative Arts Education · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member and commend him on his work in trying to get Reading Gaol opened as an arts space. A project in Selsey in my constituency is trying to restore a beautiful old pavilion, which used to hold many events but was then left to go to rack and ruin. The Selsey Pavilion Trust is working tirelessly to try and get that venue up and running so that the Selsey community can once again enjoy arts in their own town. As a country, we have a duty to ensure that the next generation of employees is suitably equipped to join a sector that can drive the growth and innovation that the UK needs now more than ever. We must ensure that a career in the arts continues to be seen by our young people as a viable and valuable choice well into the future. I remember having that debate with my mum, in an Italian restaurant at the age of 18, after I had been accepted to go to university to study business. I confessed that I was following that path so that I could get a proper job, and that I did not believe that she could possibly support me in following my real desire: to study theatre. Luckily, she did, and it paid off—I turned down that place at university, and a year later went to the University of Chichester to study theatre. My degree not only taught me the craft of performing arts, but developed valuable personal and employment skills, such as collaborative working, demonstrating initiative and problem solving. To be clear, the creative arts are a broad field that includes many artistic disciplines. Although my background is performing arts and drama, when I talk about a lack of creative arts in our education system, I refer not just to drama, but to music, dance, visual arts, creative writing, textiles, and the design and technology subjects. In this debate, I want to focus on the structure of the English baccalaureate, and the failure to include arts subjects in it. This is putting arts education in the UK in an urgent state of crisis, and will have a wider impact on the creative sector if not addressed by this Government. The English baccalaureate requires children to take up GCSEs in several subjects, none of which is in the arts. Since its introduction in 2010, arts subjects have seen a drastic decline in the number of students taking them further in their education: a 29% decrease in drama, a 24% decrease in music, and a 65% reduction in the six design and technology subjects. Compare that with geography, which has seen increase of 42%; history, which has seen an increase of 33%; and the single sciences, which are up by 38%. The issue is very apparent in my constituency. Chichester College is investing in a state-of-the-art science, technology, engineering and maths building, which is due to open shortly—I applaud its work in getting that building up and running—while cancelling its drama A-level for new students this coming year, because of a lack of take-up. That has upset many students in the Chichester constituency.

• 18 Dec 2024 · Creative Arts Education · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered creative arts education. It is a pleasure to open this debate about the importance of creative arts education. I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, both as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on performing arts education and training and as trustee of Chichester Festival Theatre. Throughout December, my diary, like those of all Members across the House, is jam-packed with wonderful occasions that feature a celebration of the arts—be they carol concerts in local churches, school plays or pantomimes. I have loved the live music on my high street at the Chichester Christmas market. I had a fantastic time as the guest judge at the Priory Park pantomime, and once the House rises I will be off to enjoy the Chichester Festival Youth Theatre’s production of “Cinderella”—a professional production on the main stage—with my family. I had the privilege of performing on that stage as a member of that very same youth theatre: an experience that I still treasure as an adult, and one that encouraged me to continue my education in the creative arts. After studying drama at GCSE and A-level, I went on to the University of Chichester and obtained a degree in performing arts. Before this giddy world of politics ensnared me, I had the privilege of teaching the next generation performing arts at various organisations and in schools. I am living proof that a creative education can lead anywhere, including to this place. The arts and cultural sector contributes well over £8 billion to the UK economy each year. It puts £2.5 billion directly into the Treasury through taxation, and the creative industries as a whole generated £125 billion in 2022. They account for almost 6% of the UK economy, create 2.5 million jobs and have a huge impact on the tourism economy, with one in 10 tourists to the UK visiting a theatre. Theatres sell 34 million tickets a year across the UK.

• 18 Dec 2024 · Creative Arts Education · Hansard source

  More

  I am glad that the hon. Member is the first person in the room to raise STEAM. Adding arts to the STEM subjects is such an important and viable way of opening up the curriculum. When I visit private schools in my constituency, their arts departments are flourishing. An article in The Times in November found that nearly half of all film and television directors nominated for British Academy of Film and Television Arts awards were educated at independent schools, and one in six was educated at Oxford or Cambridge. That highlights the stark class inequalities in access to the creative industries, which will worsen if the trend of de-prioritising arts education in state schools and colleges continues. I will not ask hon. Members to take my word for it. Earlier this week, I spoke to Hugh Bonneville—yes, I am willing to name-drop my friend—who wrote in his book “Playing Under the Piano” about a school he visited in 2019: a newly built academy that taught around 2,000 students. It was an impressive school, but it had no music provision, no choir, no band, and no studio space for drama or dance. The students who were working on scenes from “Romeo and Juliet” had pushed the bookshelves to one side in a corner of the library to create a rehearsal space. As Hugh wrote: “How on earth is the next generation of those who drive the multi-billion pound entertainment and creative industries to be discovered, or even to take part?” The current structure of the English baccalaureate is opposed by teachers, education experts, trade unions, artists and the creative sector. Perhaps more importantly, a survey by the Cultural Learning Alliance concluded that one of the advantages of arts-based studies is stronger educational attainment generally, and there are well-acknowledged connections between participation in the performing arts and stronger self-motivation, as well as improved physical and mental wellbeing and the development of inner resilience. Any organisation or charity currently working to support young people can describe the acute mental health crisis that our young people face. One example is the Young People’s Shop, a charity operating in Chichester that, alongside its counselling service, runs arts-based group sessions, recognising the link between mental health and creative expression. The Liberal Democrats have long called for a mental health professional in every school and I applaud that. Given the connection I have laid out, I strongly advocate working closely with creative arts provision in schools as an outlet for expression and stress relief. I take this opportunity to acknowledge the role that outside organisations play in giving our young people a creative education. Some of my happiest memories are of evenings spent at my local amateur dramatic society rehearsing for the upcoming panto, and Thursday evenings throughout the year with my friends at Chichester Festival Youth Theatre. I pay tribute to organisations such as Chichester Festival Theatre, which has one of the most ambitious youth theatres in the country. It acknowledged that its youth theatre was not reaching as well as it could the communities that would benefit from access, so it created seven satellite youth theatres across West Sussex to ensure that each of those communities has access to top-quality education, classes for students with additional needs, and theatre-based courses for school refusers and those out of mainstream education. CFT even launched a technical youth theatre for young people more interested in the workings of the backstage than the front stage. I recognise how lucky we in Chichester are to have a theatre, such as CFT, that puts learning and participation at the core of everything it does, but I want every child in this country to have the opportunity afforded to my constituents.

• 4 Dec 2024 · Future of Farming · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Roger. I congratulate the hon. Member for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart) on securing this important debate. Farmers are environmental stewards, custodians of our heritage and vital contributors to our local economies. Yet, under the previous Conservative Government, rural and farming communities were totally undervalued and undermined. In my constituency, more than 18,000 hectares of farmland, spread across 178 holdings, produce some of the best food in the country. I have had the pleasure of meeting some of my local farmers, who tell me that their futures are now under threat. The Chancellor’s 2024 Budget imposes a series of damaging policies on rural communities. Cutting agricultural property relief risks the viability of family farms. In Chichester, it could affect nearly 50 farms. When farmers are faced with the choice either to be in debt or to sell off land to pay the tax, the choice will be clear and farms will be eroded. The introduction of the carbon border adjustment mechanism will add an estimated £50 per tonne to fertiliser costs. Combined with the 1.9% cut to day-to-day spending at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, those changes will make sustainable farming practices harder to achieve.

• 4 Dec 2024 · Future of Farming · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with my hon. Friend that it is a series of things, compounded on top of each other, making our farmers feel totally let down. They felt ignored by the Conservative Government for years. When Labour stood on a manifesto pledge of change, farmers did not think this would be the change they were promised. Farmers in Chichester and across the UK deserve better. They are critical to our food supply, environment and rural way of life. I urge the Government: please stop undermining them and start supporting them. Let us work together to ensure that farming remains a thriving and sustainable pillar of our nation for generations to come. I call on the Government to look at the Liberal Democrats’ manifesto pledges, such as a £1 billion increase in the farming budget to support sustainable agriculture, the renegotiation of our trade agreements to protect British farmers from being undercut by imports failing to meet UK standards, and a reinstatement of the capital grants scheme to support environmentally friendly farming practices. I am aware that many Members want to speak, so I will leave it there.

• 3 Dec 2024 · National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to share the concerns that my constituents and businesses in Chichester have raised with me since the announcement in the Chancellor’s Budget that employer’s national insurance contributions would be increased. First, I would like to acknowledge the Labour Government’s inheritance from the previous Government, and recognise that tough decisions need to be made to rebuild public services, especially our health service. The Liberal Democrats welcome the proposed increase to employment allowance, but the blanket increase in the rate of secondary class 1 contributions across all sectors is going to make things harder for GPs, social care providers, charities and local authorities in my constituency and across the country. Those sectors have had a tough time for years, struggling with rising energy costs and higher interest rates, with thousands of care providers on the brink of bankruptcy, NHS dentists already delivering some NHS treatments at a financial loss, and charities already grappling with underfunded public sector contracts. West Meads GP surgery is one of the smaller practices in Bersted in my constituency. It is looking at increased costs of at least £25,000, which will mean a reduction in staffing hours. The GP who wrote to me said: “This is a first and will certainly impact on patient care if not addressed.” The same can be said for Witterings Medical Centre, another practice that is already operating under extraordinary demand. The added costs will exacerbate strain in the system, because overstretched and under-resourced GPs will lead to an increase in hospital admissions, overwhelming NHS capacity at a time when it already cannot cope. The Government’s treatment of GPs as private entities excludes them from the employment allowance support, and if we do not fix the front and the back door of our national health service, the middle—our secondary care, our hospitals—will continue to bear the burden. St Wilfrid’s hospice echoes these challenges, citing the inequity in exemptions being granted to NHS services, but not to charities providing similar health-related services. The hospice predicts a bill increase of £175,000. That would pay for four nurses, who could be out in the community providing care for the most vulnerable. The predicted national impact of this rise on the charitable sector is £1.4 billion. While I am on the topic of charities, I would like briefly to mention Stonepillow, a charity that supports individuals experiencing homelessness and with compound needs. It has seen a doubling of demand since 2018—it serves 1,000 clients annually—and it reports needing to find an additional £150,000 every year to continue offering its service. The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care talked of moving the health model in this country from treatment to prevention and from hospital to community, but the increase in NICs directly undermines the ability to do that, if GPs have to reduce their services, if more dentists move further away from NHS contracts, if social care staff lose their jobs when their small and medium-sized care providers go bankrupt, and if community pharmacies, a key pillar in the NHS ecosystem, face spiralling debt and struggle to keep pace with operating costs. In the interests of constructive opposition, I am not minded to bring problems without solutions. The Chancellor could have chosen to raise the money needed through the much fairer tax changes laid out in the Liberal Democrat manifesto during the general election, such as the reversal of the Conservative tax cuts for the big banks, doubling the rate of gaming duty paid by online gambling services or a fairer reform of capital gains tax. If I had more than 10 seconds left, I would give many other reasons why I am unfortunately unable to support this Bill on Second Reading.

• 27 Nov 2024 · Budget · Hansard source

  More

  Total income from farming in Northern Ireland fell by 44% last year amid volatile markets, soaring costs and declining output. More than 6,000 Northern Ireland farmers recently gathered in the Eikon exhibition centre to highlight the impact that the changes to agricultural property relief will have on their sector. With dairy farming facing serious economic challenges and gross agricultural output declining, can the Secretary of State commit to publishing a full impact assessment of APR removal for Northern Ireland’s farming sector, as well as its wider implications?

• 26 Nov 2024 · “Get Britain Working” White Paper · Hansard source

  More

  Under the Conservatives the UK’s was the only economy to see employment rates fall over the last five years, leaving a legacy of wrecked apprenticeships, mental health services not fit for purpose and millions on waiting lists unable to work, as well as those with caring responsibilities staying at home to provide care for their loved ones because of the failure in our social care system. The Liberal Democrats welcome steps to improve access to skills, training and education. I praise the work of Fedcap and Maximus UK, which are doing just that in Chichester in conjunction with the jobcentres, working with those who have had long periods of economic inactivity or have additional challenges in finding work. But the insecurity and short-term nature of Government funding for such projects means that both organisations had to pause their referrals this year while they waited for the Government to confirm their continued funding. I am sure that the Secretary of State agrees that to get people back into work, the organisations already trying to do that need more security from the Government. When it comes to tackling the mental health crisis, it is not enough to reverse the Conservatives’ lack of action. The Government must be proactive in improving mental health services. I invite the Secretary of State to take the proactive ideas that the Liberal Democrats laid out in our general election manifesto such as catching more mental health conditions early on by offering mental health MOTs and the introduction of mental health hubs in every community to deliver ease of access to walk-in services and support. It is abundantly clear that ensuring people get the NHS treatment they need is critical to getting people back to work. The NHS cannot tackle its long waiting lists unless the Government get serious about fixing the crisis in social care. We have heard a lot of words from the Government on social care but seen little action, with the increase in the social care budget totally eroded by the national insurance contribution rise. Does the Secretary of State agree that a healthy society is a productive society and that fixing the health and social care crisis will get our country back to work?

• 13 Nov 2024 · Educational Opportunities · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Mr Pritchard, for your chairmanship. I wish to contribute to this debate by talking about education opportunities that are close to my heart in the creative industries, and the barriers in this country to a creative education. I come to this place as a proud graduate of University of Chichester in my constituency, and I am living proof that a creative qualification can lead someone down many paths, including to this place. Years of underfunding and poor organisation means that, despite a booming creative industry in the UK, young people are finding it increasingly difficult to attain the education they need to enter the sector, especially through the state system. There has been a significant drop in arts enrolment at A-level, with a 29% decline since 2010. Government grants for arts education have fallen 40% in real terms over the past decade, and the number of those teaching arts-based subjects dropped by 27% between 2011 and 2024. I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Interests as a trustee of Chichester Festival Theatre, which has a thriving learning, education and participation department, and it is leading the way in giving access to performing arts education to those from underprivileged backgrounds. Pallant House Gallery also has a fantastic education and outreach department, and both Chichester College and the University of Chichester are creating the next generation of creatives who will feed into a creative industry, which the hon. Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan) mentioned, is worth £126 billion to the economy and creates 2.4 million jobs. The work that charities and organisations are doing in this space to reduce barriers to opportunity is immeasurable, and their work is at risk if local authorities are not appropriately funded to ensure that their non-statutory obligations are protected. The nature of the English baccalaureate means that it restricts take-up of the creative subjects and adds additional barriers to artistic education, which is why the Liberal Democrats are committed to including arts within it and ensuring Ofsted monitors schools so they provide a broad curriculum, including arts, with links to the creative and digital sectors. That would encourage young people to continue with an arts-based qualification, which is shown to be beneficial to their mental health. It would also improve results in subjects such as English and maths, and attainment in education as a whole. The UK arts and creative industries are crucial to the UK economy and cultural identity, so there should be no barriers to the educational opportunities the sector can bring. I look forward to hearing the Minister commit to recognising the importance of a creative education.