Jim Shannon MP: speeches

Speeches

• 8 Jan 2026 · Myanmar: Religious Minority Persecution · Hansard source

  More

  Just one thing to confirm, Minister, and I think it is something that each and every one of us who has spoken has raised: we have all highlighted the issue that the aid the Government are sending to Myanmar is not getting to the refugees, that the junta—the military—is stopping it and is an obstacle to it getting there. We are all seeking an assurance that the aid will get to the refugees, which is where it is needed, and that the junta will not try to stop it. Please.

• 8 Jan 2026 · Myanmar: Religious Minority Persecution · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered religious minority persecution in Myanmar. This is something that has been on my mind, and the mind of lots of us, for some time. We may not know very much about Myanmar in relation to religious persecution, but I am glad to see my friend and colleague in the Gallery who, along with Rev. Cecil Rasa, told us all about what was happening. This debate has also been some time coming. There has been great interest from many hon. Members in holding Backbench Business debates, so it has taken until now for us to have this opportunity, but I am very pleased to have it and I thank the Backbench Business Committee. It is indeed an honour to introduce this debate on Myanmar and to speak once again for those whose voices are silenced by violence, repression and fear. We will hear some of the things—hopefully others will contribute as well—that relate to just how bad the situation is in Myanmar. I speak today because freedom of religion or belief is not a peripheral concern; it is a foundational human right. When freedom of religion or belief collapses, other rights collapse alongside it: freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, access to justice and, ultimately, the right to life itself. Myanmar today is a stark example of that truth. Since the military coup of February 2021, religious freedom in Myanmar has continued to worsen amid civil war.

• 8 Jan 2026 · Myanmar: Religious Minority Persecution · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

• 8 Jan 2026 · Myanmar: Religious Minority Persecution · Hansard source

  More

  As always, the right hon. Member brings wisdom to the debate. He is right to highlight that the Tatmadaw and the authorities are using people’s religion and race as reasons to legitimise repression. As far as they are concerned, they do not want people to have anything, and by focusing on those things, they take away the very right to express religious belief—to have a race, a different culture and a different history. Another root cause is Myanmar’s discriminatory legal architecture, particularly its citizenship regime, which probably highlights the very point that the right hon. Member just referred to. The 1982 citizenship law embeds exclusion by tying full citizenship to state-defined nationality categories and strict criteria, while granting wide discretion over who qualifies—in other words, it directly discriminates. Amnesty International documents how this framework has left most Rohingya without full citizenship rights, despite generations of residence in Rakhine state. Citizenship denial is not symbolic; it is operational. Amnesty shows how exclusion from citizenship underpins restrictions on freedom of movement, access to education, healthcare, participation in public life and legal protection. It forms the backbone of the apartheid-like system imposed on Rohingya communities. Amnesty also documents how temporary registration cards, often known as “white cards”, were revoked, leaving many Rohingya without identity documentation linked to rights or political participation—even further entrenching their vulnerability. This is not an accident of bureaucracy. When a state writes exclusion into its citizenship law, it builds persecution into the legal system itself—and that is how it pursues its goals. Impunity compounds all of this. The military’s long history of avoiding accountability encourages repetition. Atrocities become a tactic, not an aberration. UN fact-finding missions have emphasised the need for criminal investigation and prosecution, yet meaningful accountability remains elusive. There are also factors that worsen and sustain this crisis. UN investigators have highlighted the role of social media, particularly Facebook, in spreading hate speech and incitement against the Rohingya. That does not absolve the state of responsibility, but it shows how hatred has been amplified and normalised. Doing it so often means that it becomes a way of life that focuses on those who are in a religious minority. Of course, we cannot point fingers outwards and not look internally. International action also plays a role. The right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) mentioned Myanmar in the main Chamber debate and referred to the Magnitsky sanctions that need to be in place for some of the Myanmar leaders. With great respect, the Government—this has been going on for a number of years, so it is not just this Government, but previous ones—have not pursued those involved in horrendous things in Myanmar, but they should have. When decisive multilateral action stalls, the junta itself can outlast condemnation. Annual monitoring shows that detention, attacks on religious sites and the obstruction of aid continues despite years of international concern. Humanitarian obstruction remains a central tool of control. The USCIRF states that the military has blocked or prohibited critical aid from reaching displaced people, worsening their suffering and vulnerability —especially for minorities. All my life I have said that if a person is denied their human rights, they are also denied their religious viewpoint, and if they are denied their religious viewpoint, their human rights are also denied. The question is: what should be done and what can realistically be done? We cannot solve all the problems of the world—if only we could—but the bit that we can do, we should do. In the immediate term, civilians and places of worship must be protected. Humanitarian aid must be allowed to reach those in need. I am sure that the Minister will be able to confirm where, or if, that is happening. I ask that the Foreign Office tie the substantial funding that we give to Myanmar to the principle of freedom of religion or belief. The UK has provided over £190 million for aid, healthcare and civil society since the 2021 coup, including some £66.45 million in the financial year 2024-25 alone. That was boosted by £10 million for the 2025 earthquake, with further funds for the refugee crisis—always with enhanced due diligence to avoid the military regime benefiting. We must leverage our goodness to them and ensure their goodness to their own. In the medium term, the international community must constrain the junta’s capacity to wage war, including through air power, and strengthen evidence gathering and accountability mechanisms. Those who carry out abysmal and despicable crimes need to be made accountable, and the evidence needs to be gathered and made ready so that we can at some stage hold them accountable. Diplomacy can be a mighty tool and I believe that we can do more. In the long term, there can be no durable peace without an inclusive settlement in which citizenship and equality are restored—especially for the Rohingya—so that freedom of religion or belief is protected by law, not dependent on good will or military discretion. For many years, the House has repeatedly raised concerns about freedom of religion or belief and wider human rights abuses in Myanmar. The question now is whether our actions match the scale of the crisis. I have a number of questions for the Minister. First, will the Government commit to regular, published assessments of freedom of religion or belief and human rights in Myanmar, using independent monitoring benchmarks? It is really important that we have an independent body that is able to assess what is happening in Myanmar specifically. Through that, we will be able to gauge whether persecution is decreasing, or if there is any more action that we could take. Secondly, what further steps will the UK take with allies to constrain the junta’s capacity for attacks that destroy religious sites and kill civilians? The air force has been used to bomb and kill, and to destroy churches and even hospitals and schools—nothing is ruled out in the junta’s attacks. Something really needs to be done to ensure that they stop. Thirdly, how will the Government ensure that humanitarian aid reaches displaced minorities when the military deliberately blocks assistance? We know evidentially that whenever aid was sent from here to Myanmar, the military blocked it, put obstacles in its way and ensured that assistance did not get to the people that it should have. Fourthly, what additional support will be provided to the accountability pathways identified by UN fact-finding work on genocide and other international crimes? I would love to have the people who have carried out these crimes made accountable in the court of this world, and then jailed accordingly. I am a Christian; I know that whenever they come to the next world, they will be accountable then. We all know where they will end up: they will end up in a place that is very warm—in hell. Still, I would love to see them get their justice in this world, just as they will get their justice in the next—I know that is going to happen, no matter what. Myanmar’s crisis is not only political. It is a crisis of conscience, where identity is punished, worship is targeted, and the law itself—as the right hon. Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis) said—is used as a weapon. This House must continue to speak clearly, consistently and persistently for those who cannot. Let us not be weary in doing good, and let us do what we can in Myanmar. I believe that with renewed focus, we can reap a harvest of freedom for those living in fear in that place. Our job today is to speak for them. They have no voice; today, we are their voice.

• 8 Jan 2026 · Myanmar: Religious Minority Persecution · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend—he has been my friend for all the time I have known him—for his intervention. He is absolutely right, and he has outlined, in those two or three sentences, what this debate is all about. It is an opportunity to highlight religious minorities and persecution, with a focus on Myanmar. Independent monitoring by the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom documents the destruction and occupation of religious sites, the killing of clergy and civilians, and the deliberate obstruction of humanitarian aid by the military authorities. Churches, mosques and monasteries have been affected by airstrikes, shelling and arson. In some cases, places of worship have been occupied or used by troops, turning sites of prayer into military targets. Aid convoys have been blocked or prohibited, even in areas of acute need. Religious leaders have been detained and harassed. I know there are many issues demanding the attention of this House, and there has just been a debate in the main Chamber about the same thing, but I often think of Galatians 6:9, which urges us not to grow weary in doing good, for in due season we will reap if we diligently sow. The Bible very clearly gives us a challenge—indeed, it is a directive—about what we should do. We must not allow Myanmar to become a forgotten crisis, where atrocities continue in plain sight. We must continue to do what we can to help the vulnerable and the needy, and there are many of them. The junta’s violence is nationwide, but its impact is especially severe on minority communities and on religious life itself. The USCIRF reports that over 3.4 million people have been displaced in recent years. That includes some 90,000 people displaced in Christian-majority Chin state, and around 237,200 in Kachin state. Alongside this internal displacement, around 1 million Rohingya refugees remain in Cox’s Bazar in Bangladesh, living in prolonged exile, with absolutely no indication of when they will be able to return. That is one of the things we should look at today. I should have said that I am very pleased to see the Minister in her place. I always look forward to the Minister’s response. I wish her well in her role, and I look forward to her replies to our questions. Those figures are not abstract. They represent families torn from their homes, congregations scattered, and communities unable to gather safely to worship. For many, the simple act of practising their faith has become a source of danger. This is not only a freedom of religion or belief issue viewed in isolation; it sits within a much wider framework of state violence. UN-linked reporting has documented systematic torture by Myanmar’s security forces, including cases involving children, as well as sexual abuse and sexual attacks on women and girls. I do not know whether it is my age, but I certainly get more affected by the things happening in the world than I ever did before. It is almost inconceivable to comprehend all the horror taking place. It is important to note that FoRB violations in Myanmar are part of a broader pattern of repression and brutality. They are not isolated incidents. The plight of the Rohingya Muslims remains one of the gravest examples of this persecution. UN fact finders concluded that there were grounds to investigate senior Tatmadaw leaders for genocide and other international crimes, and they explicitly called for criminal investigation and prosecution. Can the Minister confirm whether she is aware of a criminal investigation taking place? Are there grounds for prosecution? Obviously, that would all be built on evidence, but has that started? Crucially, this issue did not begin and end in 2017. Amnesty International has described a state-sponsored system of apartheid in Rakhine state marked by institutional discrimination, segregation and extreme restrictions on movement and daily life. Rohingya communities are confined, controlled and denied access to basic services. A people stripped of citizenship, boxed in by policy, and punished for trying to move—this is not merely insecurity; it is engineered oppression. Christian communities have also suffered targeted attacks, particularly in Chin, Kachin and Karenni areas. The USCIRF documents repeated attacks on churches and confirms that the military has destroyed religious buildings and killed clergy and civilians through airstrikes and arson. The USCIRF further reports that at least 128 religious persons have been detained by the authorities, including 113 Buddhist monks, one imam and 14 Christians. These are not random arrests. They reflect a deliberate effort to intimidate religious leadership and community life. There are many examples, but one case in particular brings this into sharp focus: Rev. Hkalam Samson of the Kachin Baptist Convention—a respected Christian leader who is much loved in his area—was arrested, granted amnesty, and then re-arrested within hours. This is injustice. It is harassment, designed to send a message that no religious leader is beyond reach—no religious leader is safe. More broadly, independent monitoring documents attacks and intimidation affecting multiple faith communities in churches, mosques and monasteries, and across several regions and states. When places of worship themselves become targets, freedom of religion or belief ceases to exist in any meaningful sense in the area—not just for the places of worship themselves, but for the practising Christians, Rohingya Muslims and people of other faiths as well. We must also be clear about why these abuses occur. Many analysts argue that the Tatmadaw has long instrumentalised race and religion narratives to legitimise repression. It is beyond dispute that independent monitoring documents repeated targeting of religious leaders and religious sites across communities, reflecting persecution linked to identity rather than military necessity. They are being targeted because of who they are—because of their religious beliefs.

• 8 Jan 2026 · Myanmar: Religious Minority Persecution · Hansard source

  More

  I thank all hon. Members for their contributions, including those who have now left. The hon. Member for Slough (Mr Dhesi), as always, very clearly highlighted the issue of the Rohingya Muslims; the fragile peace, if it is such a thing as peace; and the fragile conditions in which they live. We all look forward to contributions from the right hon. Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis), because they are always very applicable to the issues. His question was who is behind this and what their purpose is. Quite clearly, the junta is focusing on race and religious beliefs. It is a pleasure to see the hon. Member for Hornsey and Friern Barnet (Catherine West) in her place. I thank her for her well-known interest in the issue. We can almost see how de-stressed she is as a result of not being the Minister any more, but we very much welcome her contribution. She referred to the need for sanctions, and I will come to that point in a wee minute. The hon. Member for Leicester South (Shockat Adam) voiced the intelligent thought that the junta is holding power through fear, propped up by others outside. A really important question, which may have been raised in the intervention from the right hon. Member for New Forest East, is “If the junta falters, do we step in or does somebody else?” If the Minister does not mind, perhaps she could come back to us on that point. The hon. Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst) told me earlier today about his particular interest in the subject. We thank him for his contribution and his interest for all those years as a Labour party member. He referred to the fact that the elections will not be free or democratic, and to the need for sanctions. My good friend the hon. Member for Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber (Brendan O’Hara), who brings great knowledge of the world to these debates, referred to sexual violence. The hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding) spoke about mass killing and economic collapse. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell), put things very clearly in his contribution and referred to perpetrators being made accountable. My very last ask is whether the Government will commit to publishing regular assessments of freedom of religious belief and human rights in Myanmar, using independent monitoring—I think we need an independent person to do that. Once again, I thank the Minister and everyone else for their contributions.

• 8 Jan 2026 · Human Rights Abuses: Magnitsky Sanctions · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the right hon. Gentleman for giving way. He is right to bring this issue forward. Some 229 people have designated by the United Kingdom, and 3,000 Russians have been designated after the invasion of Ukraine. However, weak enforcement risks hollowing out the regime. To date, no fines have been imposed for breaches of the UK’s Magnitsky-style sanctions. If this House is serious about protecting life and dignity, we must ensure that these tools are used consistently and enforced credibly. I am often reminded of the example of Jesus Christ, the greatest leader and yet the greatest servant. He protected lives by giving his own. We, as leaders, should echo his example by diligently helping those who cannot help themselves.

• 8 Jan 2026 · Local Bus Services · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his answers to the seven questions on the Order Paper about buses. The Holy Bible refers to seven as the perfect number. If we are to improve local bus services, we need to improve the type of buses that are manufactured, make them energy efficient, and provide an hourly service. What discussions has the Minister had with Wrightbus in Northern Ireland about the production of more electric buses? Will he acknowledge the superior quality of those buses, and the company’s capacity to deliver high-quality buses, which are best of British, at a good price?

• 8 Jan 2026 · Local Bus Services · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 8 Jan 2026 · Subsea Telecommunications Cables: Resilience and Crisis Preparedness · Hansard source

  More

  I very much welcome the Select Committee’s report. The very nature of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, in being a member of NATO, means that it has protection, and therefore the connection from the mainland across the Irish sea to Northern Ireland is protected. However, what is not protected is the Republic of Ireland, which is not a member of NATO, although it is a member of the EU. What consideration did the Committee give to the fact that the Republic of Ireland could be the vulnerable back door when it comes to subsea telecommunication cables, and what has been done to address that?

• 7 Jan 2026 · Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 7 Jan 2026 · Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  I commend the hon. Gentleman. He is putting forward good points about agriculture and how the economy can build off it. Northern Ireland has £6 billion-worth of manufacturing and exports, and it is critical for it to do well, as well. One thing that holds us back is veterinary and medicines, and the Northern Ireland protocol. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that in order for us go forward with the rest of the United Kingdom, the Northern Ireland protocol should be addressed? Perhaps when the Minister responds to the debate she can give us some ideas on that.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Bromsgrove: Local Government · Hansard source

  More

  I spoke to the hon. Gentleman beforehand to get his thoughts on what he was trying to achieve. Does he agree that local government must be efficient, accessible and accountable, and that consolidation is worth while, but not at the expense of the accessibility of services? Hailing from the rural constituency of Strangford, where constituents do not have accessible local government, I support the hon. Gentleman in his quest to ensure that it is a priority in any restructuring.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Rural Fuel Duty Relief · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you very much, Ms Furniss, for again inviting me to speak early. It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship. I also thank the hon. Member for North Devon (Ian Roome) for securing this debate on a very important issue. When we look at the price of petrol at the pumps and consider that the price per barrel has dropped significantly, the question we all ask is when the dividend will come down to those who drive on the roads of the United Kingdom. Perhaps the Minister can put that question directly to the firms responsible. This is an important issue, and it is clear that there are stipulations within the current legislation that do not extend to other rural parts of the United Kingdom. Nevertheless, I am here today to support the hon. Member for North Devon, who is renowned for being assiduous and committed on behalf of his constituents—well done to him. There is a strong case for extending the provision of the rural fuel duty relief scheme to some rural parts of Northern Ireland that have similar problems to those referenced by the hon. Member for Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber (Brendan O’Hara). Just as in North Devon, a considerable number of areas of counties such as Fermanagh, Armagh and Down are sparsely populated. Furthermore, residents in these areas rely heavily on private vehicles because public transport is extremely limited. I am contacted weekly by constituents regarding rural bus services, so this issue is real and is felt throughout many areas in Northern Ireland. Historically, we have witnessed a significant fuel price difference between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, sometimes as much as 15p to 25p per litre. There are times when rural Northern Ireland has significantly higher fuel prices, and families who live close to the border travel into the Republic of Ireland to get fuel as it saves them so much money. People in rural areas that do not have such access cannot do that. I support local, and I always have. I live in a rural section of my constituency, too. I choose to support local businesses when buying fuel, rather than going to the likes of Asda where the fuel might be cheaper. Independent rural businesses have no choice but to charge more, given that they are in less populated areas. I believe there is a duty on those who can to support their local independents. Fuel is a huge expense that many families and individuals are not able to avoid. The hon. Member for North Devon made a point about the 5p a litre rebate simply not stretching as it needs to. He clearly outlined that case, and the Minister will perhaps listen. It has not increased in line with inflation since 2010, losing around 35% of its actual value. There is no doubt that a review is needed to ensure that rural drivers across the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland can benefit. I am conscious that other hon. Members wish to speak, so I will not go on too long. Lower fuel costs can achieve better access to education, healthcare and services for rural residents who should not be left behind. At a time when money is tight and so many feel the stretch, there is more to be talked about and more that we can do. Again, I urge the Minister to engage with his counterparts to protect rural drivers in Northern Ireland as well as on mainland UK. The same benefits should apply to all rural areas of this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Jury Trials · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the shadow Secretary of State for bringing this issue forward. Just to give an example for when he is looking at options, in Northern Ireland we had cause to use Diplock courts on many occasions. In 2023, they were used on 0.8% of occasions. Terrorist trials and serious criminal trials do not have a jury because of intimidation. However, does he agree that our natural sense of justice demands a jury of our peers, that non-jury trials must remain exceptional, and that justice can be served more efficiently by juries, by increasing court dates, and by cutting the number of ineffective trials that waste time—the very thing he has referred to?

• 7 Jan 2026 · UK Town of Culture · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you for calling me so early, Ms Furniss. I was about to sit down, but I now have the unexpected pleasure of following the hon. Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger). It is wonderful to be here. I am sure that everyone is going to say that their constituency is the best, but mine is the best and I will try to explain why. The hon. Member has persuaded me of one thing: if I am spared, I will make it my business to visit his constituency and see if what says is true. I am sure it is—I do not doubt it for a second. The debate presents a wonderful opportunity to showcase all our wonderful constituencies, and I am sure that we will all plead the case very well. However, I say proudly that my constituency of Strangford may just edge it—at least I believe that that will be the case—but we will see how the debate develops and whether others are persuaded by my words. The principle of the competition—and it is a competition—is a great idea. Of course, the heavy issues that we discuss daily are important—they are critically important to County Down—but it is also important that we celebrate our local towns and all that they do for communities across the United Kingdom. The hon. Member for Halesowen is right that the largest town is the core of a constituency. I often talk about my constituency in the House. I always try to relate the issues we discuss to the situation back home, because those issues matter to people across the whole of the United Kingdom, although sometimes their scope is restricted by area. I am grateful that we all have the opportunity to showcase culture and I will focus on the wonderful town of Newtownards, which is the biggest town in the constituency and where my advice centre is. There are other notable towns such as Comber, Ballynahinch and Crossgar. I am not sure if hon. Members knows where those places are, but they are all in my constituency, and I make sure that Strangford is mentioned in nearly every intervention that I make and in every debate in which I participate. Comber has a long history that dates back to the 17th century. It played an important role in the agricultural and linen industries that Northern Ireland had for many years, although unfortunately that is not the same today, giving it a unique cultural and economic heritage that is preserved in local museums and historical societies, which the hon. Member for Halesowen referred to in his contribution. Newtownards is home to my main constituency office, where I support thousands of constituents. It is a town where history, heritage and creativity come together to form a truly unique cultural identity. Newtownards is a canvas of heritage. Anyone walking through the streets can see the historical Market House, the Scrabo tower and the old buildings that frame Conway Square. The hon. Member for Halesowen referred to cafés, but we have created a coffee culture in Conway Square, where a large number of coffee shops have opened in the last four to five years. There are family-owned shops: Wardens has been going since 1877 and Knotts is there too. The Old Cross, now the Parlour pub, was first built in 1735. That means that Wardens is almost 150 years old and the Parlour is 291 years old, so there is history and culture that goes back a long time. I am very proud of my Orange culture, which has shaped identities for generations. I am a member of Kircubbin Volunteers LOL 1900, and I am also worshipful master of the House of Commons lodge. The lodges and parades are more than tradition; they bring communities together and invite everyone to take part in their culture, and people do. People from different religious persuasions —maybe different political persuasions—see the pageant and the celebration of the Orange parades. From local theatre groups to vibrant music ensembles, from community murals to creative festivals, the list is never-ending. Culture should be for everyone, and I celebrate the story of that 17th-century town established in 1605: Newtownards. It was established as part of the plantation of Ulster, when English and Scottish settlers were encouraged to establish towns and farms in Ulster. I always look towards my Scottish and Gaelic brothers and sisters in this place and say to them, if we go back far enough, we might be related—we might even be cousins. Today we see that fertile land and Strangford Lough, which provided access to maritime trade, still used and loved. To conclude, I acknowledge and love to hear others’ passion for the places that they represent. I adore my towns and, more so, I thank them for what they represent for the people who live in them and the businesses that hold them together. For the ones in my constituency, where else would you find more charm per square mile? I believe Strangford and Newtownards is that very place.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Ukraine and Wider Operational Update · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. We are all encouraged by him and what he has said, and encouraged by his and this Government’s leadership. That gives us heart, so I thank him for that. Russian fighter planes are contravening fellow NATO countries’ skies, cables under the sea are being interfered with and damaged by Russian forces, and there has been interference with Royal Navy ships, but on the sea and in the air, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will not be messed with. It is time that Russia got a bloody nose, and today it got just that—not before time. This is a fraught international matter, and maritime laws are not my forte. However, something I am certain of is that Russia is no ally of ours. Its words never, ever meet its actions, and the sanctions need to be strengthened. Will the Secretary of State outline what discussions have taken place with the US and NATO on a way forward that sends a clear message to Russia that the time of pushing boundaries is over, and that today is a clear expression that we will stand firm against aggression within the confines of international law?

• 7 Jan 2026 · Advanced Brain Cancer: Tissue Freezing · Hansard source

  More

  We are both soft-hearted, as many other Members in this Chamber probably are. This man was so strong. When his wee daughter died, life became very focused on that; it will be always focused on that. I can understand how Owain’s law has come about, because families are determined to ensure that their devastation is not replicated, if one single thing can be done to prevent it. I thank those in the Public Gallery for being here. What can we do? Owain’s law is an indication of what we can do. Tissue freezing preserves DNA. Without this key, simple and cost-effective step, patients cannot access the latest cancer treatments, diagnostics and research. There is a way forward. As the Minister knows, I am always pleased to see her in her place. We are all very fond of her, and she understands things better than most—we all know the circumstances. I am looking forward to her response to the ask from the hon. Member for Caerphilly and from everyone else. To help end this preventable postcode lottery, hon. Members should please consider entering the current ballot for Health and Social Care questions, which closes today. If they can get their question in before noon today, that would be good. Next week, they would then have an opportunity to ask it on the Floor of the House, to help prevent more brain cancer patients in our constituencies from missing out. In the NHS, most brain cancer patient samples are stored in paraffin wax rather than being flash frozen in medical freezers. When this happens, patients lose access to potentially lifesaving newer treatments developed using these samples, to more precise diagnostic methods and to advanced research, including future testing to find out whether a patient’s condition is genetic and likely to be passed on to their children. That is important in the lives we lead. Some conditions are hereditary; they come from our mum or dad—maybe our grandparents—down to us, and may pass on to those who come after us. I thank Ellie’s campaign for giving me their paper before the debate, as it really does help us to understand things just that wee bit better. I know that the Minister has seen it and the three questions to her, so I do not need to repeat them—she is probably very aware of what they are. Those are the campaign’s requests. I have a couple of requests of my own, which will not come as a surprise to anyone in the Chamber, and certainly not to the Minister. New research from the Tessa Jowell Brain Cancer Mission shows that access to tissue freezing varies dramatically between trusts, meaning that eligibility for advanced treatments can depend entirely on where a patient lives. A postcode lottery is preventing my constituents in Strangford in Northern Ireland from benefiting from more precise whole genome sequencing, personalised immunotherapy and cutting-edge diagnostic options. My constituents are not the only ones affected—everyone is affected. I have received information indicating that, for just £250,000 to £400,000, every brain cancer patient in the UK could have routine access to tissue freezing by default, unlocking the treatments the Government have committed to delivering. The three questions from the Owain’s law campaign are the important ones, but can the Minister look at this issue? When we think about what we are trying to achieve in this debate, it is important that we have some goals. I know that the Minister always replies helpfully and positively to us. In Northern Ireland, funding for freezing brain tissue is primarily tied to research initiatives rather than standard patient care. A local charity called Brainwaves NI is currently funding a pilot scheme at the Belfast health and social care trust and Queen’s University Belfast, which uses rapid nanopore sequencing. I do not pretend to understand what all these things are—I am not a medical person, just an MP who tries to represent his constituents when he can. That process requires specialised tissue handling, often involving freezing, to reduce diagnosis times from weeks to hours. It is clear from all the contributions to the debate, including from those who have personal knowledge, that we do not need pilots but more equitable access to tissue freezing throughout the United Kingdom. I support the calls the hon. Member for Caerphilly has made so well on behalf of his constituents and indeed all the United Kingdom. Glioblastoma is a death sentence, but tissue freezing could change that. It is right and proper that we do all we can to see that change in all of the United Kingdom. My last request is that the Minister liaise with the regional Administrations in Scotland and Wales, and particularly with the Administration in Northern Ireland and with the Assembly. Brain cancer affects us all; it does not stop at the border of Scotland and England or in the Irish sea. It is all of us together, so we need to work together to find a way of funding a cure for advanced brain cancer. With that, I look forward very much to the Minister’s response.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Advanced Brain Cancer: Tissue Freezing · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend. That story makes today’s debate that bit more impactful for me and for us all. My friend is a veteran. He served in the forces with great courage. He has shoulders as broad as a rugby player. He is a man who could take on anything. He laid his life on the line for the freedom of everyone here. Yet, he could do nothing but watch—

• 7 Jan 2026 · Advanced Brain Cancer: Tissue Freezing · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for her comprehensive reply to all our questions. In my contribution, I mentioned that Queen’s University Belfast and the Belfast health and social care trust are doing a pilot scheme, which I hope will benefit England, Scotland and Wales. Can the Minister ask her Department’s civil servants to take that on board?

• 7 Jan 2026 · Advanced Brain Cancer: Tissue Freezing · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Western. I thank the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Chris Evans) for setting the scene so incredibly well, and the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) for all that she does—I was impressed by her contribution yesterday, and she equalled it today. I think we all know someone who has been touched by cancer. The youngest daughter of a close friend of mine was diagnosed with glioblastoma last Christmas, and she died a few weeks later. At that time, the diagnosis was bleak, and the lives of my friend and his wife were changed forever. Bleak does not even come close to the sense of loss.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Meat Exports to the EU · Hansard source

  More

  I do not want to put the Minister in an awkward position—it is not the way I do things—but I asked a fairly complex question, in support of the hon. Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe (David Chadwick) but also to highlight the peculiarities of the Northern Ireland farmer, about the fact that, through some of the veterinary medicine controls, we will find ourselves disadvantaged and perhaps unable to sell our beef and lamb to the UK and, ultimately, the EU. If it is helpful to the Minister, I would be quite happy for her to come back to me with an answer.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Meat Exports to the EU · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on securing the debate. To add to the complexity of the matter—there is always more complexity —on 1 January, new rules for veterinary medicines took effect in Northern Ireland, meaning that 40% of veterinary medicine pack sizes available to NI farmers could be discontinued due to the requirement for separate authorisations from Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Does he not agree that the large part that Northern Ireland plays in the supply of lamb and meat—worth up to some £4 billion—must be considered as part of the UK’s discussion with the EU? We should not be taken as a third nation—that is no solution. I hope that the Minister will be able to answer that question.

• 6 Jan 2026 · BBC Charter Renewal · Hansard source

  More

  If the hon. Lady had been following the thrust in my speech, I gave a number of examples of where BBC reporting has fallen down drastically, including in relation to Northern Ireland and to the monarchy. There are programmes and drama programmes that I like—I gave two examples—but the point that I am making is that when it comes to impartial reporting and journalism, the BBC falls down badly. For that reason, I believe that the contribution put forward by the right hon. Member for Maldon and others is one that I agree with.

• 6 Jan 2026 · BBC Charter Renewal · Hansard source

  More

  Many of my constituents want to unsubscribe from the BBC. Is it the same in my hon. Friend’s constituency?