Josh Newbury MP: speeches

Speeches

• 1 Jun 2026 · Health Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Before becoming an MP, I worked in communications in our NHS. Combined with numerous stories from my constituents, that gives me a view of the NHS at its best, but also where things do not work as they should. Very few of our constituents think about the structures of the NHS. For them, whether it is working right comes down to whether they can see a GP and how long it takes to get a diagnosis and treatment. I welcome the Bill because all of us have constituents who have had to give the same information over and over, wasting their time and their clinician’s time and undermining trust in the fundamentals of a unified national health service. A member of my team told me about one of her family members who suffered a stroke two years ago. He got to A&E at 11 am, was diagnosed after several hours and then at 6 pm, after several scans, was told that he needed to travel to another hospital to see a specialist. When he got there, he was told that the data had not been passed across, so all those scans and tests had to be done again. Stories like that demonstrate why the single patient record made possible by this Bill is so vital for patients, who should not have to repeat their symptoms, and for clinicians, who want to focus on care. On the abolition of NHS England, the Government are right to shift money currently tied up in monolithic bureaucracy to frontline services. But as one of, I assume, very few former NHS communicators in this House, I want to dedicate the time I have left to them. The abolition of NHSE comes at a time when ICBs are shedding half of their staff and are busy clustering. It is a time of immense change and anxiety for staff. I have recently seen a slew of posts from brilliant NHS communicators who are signing off for the last time, or posting bittersweet celebrations of securing a role while many colleagues are leaving. Some see NHS communications jobs as a “nice to have”, but the reality is they are the people who ensure that patients, from general practice through to discharge, know how to get the right care at the right time. They are the ones who spring into action when the phone lines go down. They tell the stories of real people working and getting treated in our NHS, which is so vital to encouraging others to spot early warning signs and come forward. Comms in the NHS literally saves lives, and that is why when I see comms professionals leaving the NHS, I fear that we could be throwing the baby out with the bathwater through this important and justified process of change. I pay tribute to every NHS communicator, and I hope the Minister will say a little about how these legends will be valued and retained. The Bill will do so much to improve the NHS for millions of people in our country, so I will proudly support it, but let us ensure that we know the value of everyone who makes our NHS world-class.

• 23 Apr 2026 · Allied Health Professionals · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for leading the debate and my hon. Friend the Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar), who has done so much incredible work as a physiotherapist previously and a staunch advocate of allied health professionals since her first day in this House. I pay tribute to the AHP community across my constituency. In my past life, I had the pleasure of working at the Coventry and Warwickshire partnership NHS trust, and that experience shapes how I have approached this debate. Many Members have rightly recognised the roles of physiotherapists, paramedics, occupational therapists, and speech and language therapists, which are well recognised and rightly valued. But under the AHP umbrella are an incredible group of people I would like to pay tribute to: music, art and drama therapists. Those roles are not “nice to haves”; they are a vital part of our mental health workforce. I saw during my time at CWPT how powerful the benefits of creative therapy are. As my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock described so eloquently in her excellent speech focused on paediatrics, for lots of people who have experienced trauma, who live with conditions that can make verbal communication difficult or who do not yet speak fluent English, such as refugees, common forms of talking therapy that work for so many people do not necessarily work for them. For those experiencing mutism, for example, creative therapies can be the only way they can access treatment. Through art, music and drama, lots of patients are able to process their experiences, communicate their emotions and rebuild a sense of self in ways that traditional models do not always reach. At CWPT, there was a real investment in these services. Importantly, many therapists were directly employed, rather than brought in on short-term contracts. That not only offers stability to the workforce, but for patients it allows services to embed, relationships to develop and outcomes undoubtedly to improve. I had the privilege of seeing and hearing those patients’ stories for myself, and in so many cases the work of those therapists was quite literally life-changing. Despite that, these professionals are often in short supply. Part of that issue, in my view, is visibility. These roles often are not spoken about in schools, careers advice and even, at times, in our broader conversations about the NHS workforce. There are now established degree and training pathways for these roles. They are skilled professions that require significant training and expertise and are recognised through professional bodies regulated by the Health and Care Professions Council, yet many young people with a creative inclination and flare are all too often unaware of them as a possible career path. That is a missed opportunity, both for those individuals, who often have a passion for caring and for sharing their creativity, and for our NHS and social care. The Government are rightly focused on getting more people into work—in particular young people, who are facing a tough job market—and we should be thinking expansively about the routes that are available to them, including in creative and arts-based professions. For those who are drawn to the arts, music and drama, these roles can be a way to build a deeply rewarding, stable career in the NHS—a career that combines creativity with care and contributes directly to patient wellbeing. Importantly, for those who might have spent years navigating the uncertainty of freelance creative industries, these professions can provide a real sense of stability, progression and purpose, without them having to leave any of their skills behind. That is particularly true at times of life when stability is so valuable, such as when starting a family. The Government have been clear that the workforce plan that will stem from the very welcome 10-year plan will focus on how we can make good on its priorities, including shifting care closer to patients, bringing fragmented services together and a greater focus on mental health. Sitting at the centre of the Venn diagram of all those things is creative therapies. Let us start with the therapists of tomorrow by improving awareness of those roles through schools, colleges and careers services. Let us look at widening training pathways, to ensure that these careers are open to a wide range of people, including career switchers. Currently, there is a level 7—master’s level—degree apprenticeship for the three main forms of creative therapy, but as of this year, funding for level 7 apprenticeships has been largely restricted to under-21s, so the number of people accessing those higher-level courses will now be very small. Given that in mental health, many staff move up into roles from within the workforce, it would be fantastic if an apprenticeship pathway through to creative therapist roles could be developed, similar to what we see in nursing. Above all, we should recognise that the impact of those already in these roles is not peripheral; it is central to so many patients’ care and recovery. Investing in this area would not only support individual recovery, which would ease pressure elsewhere in the system and enable the earlier intervention that so many Members have referred to, but lead to improved engagement and, ultimately, better outcomes. Art therapists, music therapists and drama therapists might not be the first roles we think of in mental health, but they can often be the ones that help our most vulnerable and isolated constituents to start to open up and communicate their experiences—often for the first time—and guide the way to wellbeing. We talk a lot in this place about workforce shortages, and rightly so. There are thousands of young people out there, including in Cannock Chase, who love music, art and drama but perhaps worry about whether there is a career for them in creative industries. They might have absolutely no idea about the enormous contribution they would make in our healthcare workforce. This is partly about recognition, but it is also about being more imaginative in how we think about both healthcare and careers advice. It is a chance to give more people a way to use their creative passion to transform lives.

• 23 Apr 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Type 1 diabetes with disordered eating, or T1DE for short, is a lethal combination of two conditions, but pilot sites set up to trial bespoke NHS services that bring specialists from both fields together have closed down due to funding coming to an end, including two earlier this month. The all-party parliamentary group on diabetes wrote to the DHSC about that in February but has not received a reply. Will the Leader of the House chase a response and ask the public health Minister to make a statement on the matter so that we can debate support for that vulnerable group of patients?

• 26 Mar 2026 · Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome and Craniocervical Instability · Hansard source

  More

  I could not agree more with my right hon. Friend. He mentioned a key word in this debate—“hope”, which is something that so many people with the conditions do not have at the moment. That is what we absolutely need to give them. I share his hope that there is a way forward, but we need to make sure that this group of patients is included in that. I am told that the rare diseases pathway could be one route forward. I would love to have the chance to explore that further with the Department alongside the people who clearly have an interest in this. The Government have rightly placed health at the centre of their agenda, and through the NHS 10-year plan we have an opportunity to build a system that is more joined up, fairer and more responsive to complex conditions like the ones I have mentioned. But patients like Connor cannot wait for long-term reform. Without action now, many will continue to face avoidable harm, worsening disability and, in some cases, irreversible deterioration. Let this be the Parliament where we turn the tide, recognise the people who are being let down, and act to ensure that no patient is left without a pathway to care simply because their condition does not yet fit the system.

• 26 Mar 2026 · Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome and Craniocervical Instability · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for her words, but I would add one point to her list, if I may, which is aftercare for people who have travelled abroad to have surgery. I understand that that is a tricky issue for the NHS, but we have heard consistently from several hon. Members today that their constituents have been rejected for any meaningful aftercare once they have come home, despite having a clear clinical need for it. Could she add that to her list to take back her officials?

• 26 Mar 2026 · Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome and Craniocervical Instability · Hansard source

  More

  I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. The exhaustion and exasperation that she refers to occurs, as we have heard from other hon. Members, time and time again. I agree that the work being done on rare diseases is incredibly important, and at the end of my speech I will come to how I hope that we can build on that work for people who suffer from these conditions. The impact on Connor’s mental health has been immense. He told me that he feels as though he is “rotting in bed”, watching his condition deteriorate without any clear route to help. He has spoken openly about how low he has felt and the thoughts that he has had because of that, including considering whether he has any options left at all. While all that is happening, his condition continues to worsen. In recent days, he has experienced seizures and episodes affecting his swallowing and breathing. These symptoms are deeply concerning and underline the urgency of his situation. In response to inquiries about what support might be available, I have been told that there is currently no established or commissioned NHS service for investigation, multidisciplinary discussion or surgery for CCI in patients with hypermobile EDS. Connor is seriously unwell and is getting worse, and he knows that there is no clear pathway for him to access the care he needs anywhere in this country. Late last year, Connor and I had the opportunity to meet with the then Minister for Public Health and Prevention, my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton). We discussed the challenges faced by people living with these complex conditions, including the lack of support in the NHS, the shortage of trained specialists and the fact that there is no way for anybody to get an upright MRI scan in the UK, which is crucial for diagnosing CCI. I was very grateful to my hon. Friend for her time and her compassion, and I would like to take this opportunity to wish her all the best with her treatment. We were joined at that meeting by representatives from the brilliant charity Ehlers-Danlos Support UK, as well as Connor’s advocate, Natasha, all of whom are in the Public Gallery with us today and have worked closely with my team to help us to better understand the link between EDS and CCI and what that means for people with those conditions. I sincerely thank them for that. What I have heard from Natasha, and from people across the UK who have contacted me, is that Connor’s is not an isolated case. I will share a few more experiences with the House to reveal the true scale and seriousness of the issue. I have heard from patients who, in 2017, were assessed for surgery here in the UK as part of a planned programme involving international specialist experience. At that point, there was not only recognition of this condition but a clear intention to treat it in the NHS. Yet those procedures were cancelled shortly before they were due to take place, leaving those people without care and without a pathway forward. What is most concerning is that, in the years since, we have not moved forward; in many ways, we have moved backwards. I have heard from people who were told that their condition was life-threatening, yet were left to face that reality alone, without support and without options. From there, the trajectory becomes all too familiar: people return again and again to NHS services, searching for answers, only to be told that nothing more can be done. I have heard from people who have had to raise extraordinary sums of money in a matter of weeks—while seriously unwell—and from families who have had to leave the UK altogether to access care, only to find themselves stranded overseas as conditions worsen and costs escalate. Even when people do receive treatment—often at enormous cost—they return home to a system that is still unable to support them, with no clear route for aftercare, rehab or specialist oversight. What is striking is not just the severity of these stories but their consistency —different people, in different parts of the country, seeing the same gaps, barriers and outcomes. Natasha has also shared her own experience with me. Like many, she spent years seeking answers within the NHS as her condition deteriorated, only to have her symptoms dismissed. At her most unwell, she lost the ability to stand, walk and even swallow properly. When she was upright, sitting or standing, even briefly, her arms became paralysed, she lost her speech and the ability to swallow, and was also losing her vision. These are absolutely horrific symptoms. Natasha was eventually forced to seek specialist care abroad, having travelled by air ambulance to get there, where she underwent lifesaving surgery at significant personal cost. Since returning to the UK, she has continued to face challenges in accessing the specialist follow-up and rehab that she needs. Despite everything she has been through, Natasha has worked tirelessly to support patients like her and to bring this issue to light. I place on record my thanks to her, not only for sharing her experience but for the work she is doing as an advocate for other people, such as Connor, in the same position. One reason why patients are passed between multiple specialists, and why diagnosis is so challenging, is the lack of access to appropriate diagnostics. Current NHS pathways are designed for CCI caused by trauma, such as road-traffic collisions, but not for EDS. In cases of traumatic instability, the problem is usually visible on standard scans performed lying down, and can be assessed through established neurological pathways—including the very fusion surgery that Connor is seeking. But in EDS, the instability comes from ligament laxity and is often positional, so that when someone is upright, the head is not adequately supported by the neck. That is often not visible when patients are lying flat in a standard MRI scanner, so their scans might appear normal despite ongoing neurological symptoms. One can see how, in cases like that, diagnoses such as Munchausen can come up. That means that many patients find themselves going back and forth within the system, often ending up in A&E with chronic symptoms and then being discharged because clinicians just do not know what to do. Symptoms can overlap with other recognised conditions, resulting in delays due to misdiagnoses and therefore missed opportunities to prevent further deterioration. There are also risks in how patients are managed during the period of instability. If instability is not recognised as a possibility, patients might be directed towards physiotherapy or exercise-based rehab, which, although well intentioned, can in some cases make things worse. At the same time, we know that CCI surgery is already performed in the NHS, yet there is no equivalent for patients with EDS. Imagine someone with a broken arm going to A&E, but being told, “I’m sorry, we only X-ray legs.” They point to their arm, the doctor can see it is broken and they can feel it is broken, but they cannot scan it, so they have to go home—over and over. Even worse, imagine if, instead of being provided with a plaster cast, they were referred to counselling. That might seem far-fetched, but that is what patients with EDS and CCI are facing. In the absence of an NHS route, patients are forced to take matters into their own hands, as I have said. In some cases, they might even require specialist medical transport to get abroad. Devastatingly, some find that their condition is too advanced for them to even make the journey. As I have said, there is then no aftercare, no consistent access to specialist imaging reviews and no co-ordinated rehab; many people are refused any of the care that would normally follow complex neurosurgery. Before I conclude, I would like to reflect on what has struck me since I began working on this issue on behalf of Connor. I have lost count of the number of people who have been in touch with me from across the country, and of the conversations with hon. Members who hear similar stories from their own constituents. I have just been told that an appeal from EDS Support UK has reached almost all MPs—over 98%. That is how many of our constituents are getting in touch with us about this issue. The conditions are often described as rare, but the truth is that for many patients they are simply rarely diagnosed. Without a pathway to diagnosis or treatment, patients with EDS and CCI are effectively invisible in NHS data. Behind every email, message and conversation is somebody trying to be heard—trying to access the care they need and live a life that many of us take for granted. I should stress that it is not easy for people living with these conditions to even do that. Many people are forced to become campaigners and lobbyists, but their energy should not be spent fighting to prove that their illness is real or to get access to basic care. They should be able to focus, as anybody should, on being believed, supported and treated. The last time EDS was debated in this Chamber was May 2024. With the general election called within days of that debate, the follow-ups on the issues raised by Members then were not possible. My ask of the Government is simple, and it comes not from me alone, but from patients, clinicians and organisations such as EDS Support UK, and from Connor. Patients are not asking for predetermined clinical outcomes or for routine surgical intervention; they are asking for recognition that suspected CCI in EDS requires a clear, defined process for assessment in the health service. In the short term, that means taking proportionate, practical steps to reduce avoidable harm, and making sure that access is appropriate, that diagnostic assessment happens and that a specialist opinion is given. It means being honest about where no pathway exists and providing clear guidance to avoid potentially harmful management when instability has not been ruled out. Finally, it means creating defined escalation routes with funding mechanisms where clinically necessary. In the longer term, we clearly need an NHS diagnostic and care pathway with proper clinical governance, referral routes, specialist input and continuity of care so that access to diagnosis and treatment is based on clinical need, not the ability to pay.

• 26 Mar 2026 · Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome and Craniocervical Instability · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered outcomes for patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and craniocervical instability. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furness. Before I start my speech, I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting us the time for this debate. I also thank Members from across the House who supported our application, and the clinicians, the charities and, most importantly, the patients who have shared their experiences in order to inform the debate. Let me also take this opportunity to warmly welcome the Minister to what is still her fairly new role. I know that throughout her time in Parliament she has been a staunch advocate for people with conditions such as less survivable cancers and other rare conditions, and for people who have suffered from medical failings, such as those with pelvic mesh. Throughout those campaigns, she has above all given voice to people who feel let down and forgotten by our healthcare system, so I know that she will empathise with much of what will be said in today’s debate. In April last year, I had an email from my constituent Connor Edwards. Connor opened his email by telling me that he was in “sheer desperation.” He explained that he was living with two conditions, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and craniocervical instability—having pronounced them correctly, I will now refer to them as EDS and CCI. I will be honest with the House: until that point, I had never heard of these conditions. I did not know how profoundly they affect people such as Connor, or the extent to which they are unseen in our NHS. Six years ago, Connor was 25 and living a very active life. He was a keen fisherman and mountain biker and, like many people in my constituency of Cannock Chase, he loved to spend his time outdoors, surrounded by the natural beauty that we are so fortunate to have on our doorstep. Connor’s story with EDS and CCI began when he was bitten by a tick while he was out on the Chase and subsequently developed Lyme disease. However, it turned out that that was only the start. In seeking explanations for his worsening health, Connor had to do so much research himself. Then, after finally seeing many specialists, he was diagnosed with EDS, a connective tissue disorder that affects the collagen responsible for supporting the skin, joints, blood vessels and internal organs. Some people living with EDS experience chronic joint dislocations, severe and persistent pain, and significant neurological complications. One of those complications in cases like Connor’s is CCI, whereby the skull no longer sits safely on the spine, placing pressure on the brain stem and spinal cord. I am conscious that I can get quite technical when I discuss Connor’s case, so I will put it in his words. He says that his head is quite literally falling off his body. Chillingly, that is not something that is picked up on a scan but not felt; rather, Connor feels his head shifting around dangerously every day, with all the pain that goes with that. He is also acutely aware that his symptoms continue to worsen. It is the intersection between EDS and CCI that I will focus on today, and I know that many other hon. Members will make important contributions about the broader challenges faced by people living with EDS.

• 26 Mar 2026 · Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome and Craniocervical Instability · Hansard source

  More

  I completely agree with my hon. Friend. In this country, we are incredibly proud of our NHS and the care that it can give people who have very common or very rare conditions. However, as I will set out further, and as he has just said, so many people with these two conditions feel very unseen, and we absolutely need to correct that. People should not have to fundraise to seek private treatment to be seen by doctors. I will ensure in my speech that the experiences of patients who develop these two conditions and serious neurological complications are heard. When I speak to Connor now, the reality of what he is living with is incredibly difficult to hear. He has told me how much he is struggling, not just with the physical symptoms of his conditions but with his battle to be recognised in our health system. He feels that his conditions are not seen, not properly assessed and too often misunderstood. Like many other people, he has been left feeling that he is not even believed. Connor told me that at one point he was barely eating, in order to try to save enough money to see a specialist neurosurgeon abroad. He does not come from a privileged background, so he has had to set up a crowdfunding page in the hope of raising enough money to get the specialist surgery and treatment that he needs. However, like so many patients in a similar situation, he is falling short. Even if he is able to reach his target and go abroad, he will be left asking the very simple question: “What happens when I come home?” He has described feeling as though he has been “gaslit” by the system, with his symptoms attributed elsewhere and his concerns not taken seriously.

• 11 Mar 2026 · Royal Mail: Universal Service Obligation · Hansard source

  More

  Phil from Brereton told me that his wife’s jury service letter arrived too late for her to defer; Colin from Brereton had a hospital letter that arrived three days after the appointment; and Michael from Rugeley waited weeks for a new debit card. Those were first-class letters, so planned reforms to the universal service obligation would not have made much of a difference. Will the Minister impress upon the leadership of Royal Mail the human impact of these delays on posties and residents?

• 9 Mar 2026 · Type 1 Diabetes: Infant Testing · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to contribute to this debate with you in the Chair, Sir Alec. I warmly welcome the Minister to her new role. Earlier this year, I was contacted by Michelle, the mum of a bright little boy called Toby who was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes when he was just 20 months old. Michelle told me that when she was a child, she happened to overhear a conversation between her mum and the mum of her best friend who had just been diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. That meant that Michelle recognised Toby’s symptoms, but, if she had not heard that conversation, she might never have made the connection. Michelle took Toby to Cannock Chase hospital and raised her concerns about some of his symptoms, such as thirst and heavy nappies, with the doctor. He said that Toby just had an ear infection, but Michelle trusted her gut and insisted on a test. She was then told to take him to A&E due to his extremely high blood glucose and ketone levels, and it was there that he was diagnosed with type 1. Not all parents will have that knowledge. Not all parents will know what to look out for, nor should they. Michelle told me that, in many ways, they had been one of the lucky families. It was because she had recognised the symptoms and pushed for a test that Toby avoided going into diabetic ketoacidosis. I want to pay tribute to Lyla and her parents, as others have, for campaigning tirelessly in their daughter’s name. As a dad myself, I cannot begin to imagine the pain that they must have been through, and I hope that through raising awareness of stories such as Lyla’s and Toby’s, we can bring about change. A single finger-prick blood glucose test is cheap and takes seconds. In fact, when I met three-year-old Toby, he showed me that he can already do it himself. Toby has thankfully had excellent care from the team at New Cross hospital, who are helping his family navigate their new way of life, but sadly, that was not the case for Lyla, or for so many families. That is exactly why we in this House need to fix this.

• 5 Mar 2026 · Palliative Care · Hansard source

  More

  I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) for securing this debate and, more importantly, for her work and advocacy on palliative care throughout her time in the House. Last August, I visited St Giles hospice in Whittington, just over the border in the Lichfield constituency; I am hugely grateful for that visit. The hospice is so well loved by my constituents, not least by the thousands of people who fundraise for it every year. We often judge our health services by how they treat illness, but the test of a good health service is also how it supports people when treatment is no longer the answer. The people I met at St Giles were doing extraordinary, skilled work. Their day-to-day is managing complex symptoms, while turning to steady a husband or reassure a daughter. That balance of clinical excellence and guiding family and friends as their loved one’s life nears its end showcases the immense skill that those nurses, doctors and support staff possess. At St Giles, I met the chief executive officer, Elinor Eustace, and saw the fruits of recent funding that they have had from the Government, and from the Francis and Eric Ford Charity Trust, which enabled them to create a new family lounge. The space gives people the chance to spend time with their loved ones away from their room, including cooking up a storm in the kitchen, nattering over a brew, or playing in the children’s area—because, heartbreakingly, St Giles is seeing more and more terminally ill people who have young children. Like all hospices, St Giles faces stark financial challenges. With only around a third of hospice funding coming from the NHS, the vast majority must be raised from donations, sponsorships and legacies. Though hospices fiercely defend their charitable mission and independence from the NHS, it is clear that the NHS and hospices have a close relationship, and always will, so public funding is critical. Having listened to hospices and the families who have relied on their world-class care, it is clear to me that the funding model for palliative care, and the recognition of the costs that hospices face, need a major shake-up. At St Giles, Elinor told me that although hospices are not bound by NHS pay scales, terms and conditions, they have to keep up with them, or they will lose many of their staff. They want to recognise the outstanding care that their highly skilled workforce provide, but the reality is that the payments they receive from the NHS often do not keep pace with increasing costs; the squeeze is tighter every year. It is the same story for many other hospices that serve my constituency, such as Acorns and the Dougie Mac. A stark example of this pressure can be seen at St Giles, where a third of beds are closed due to funding constraints—most definitely not because of a lack of demand or need. In previous years, that spare capacity has been given over to the NHS to help with winter pressures. Any hon. Members who have worked in the NHS will know that extra capacity is essential in the cold winter months; however, the amount paid for lower-level care than St Giles typically offers meant that the hospice made a loss on those beds. Donations were effectively subsidising NHS care, so, sadly, that arrangement had to be stopped. We Labour Members have to be honest that chief among the cost pressures faced by hospices in the last year has been the increase in employer national insurance contributions, which has cost St Giles £400,000. I continue to believe that given the vital role that hospices play for people at a critical time in life, and the pressures that they take off the NHS, hospices should be exempted from that increase. Not exempting them will continue to restrict the availability of end-of-life care, and will cost the NHS more in the long run. Like many in the Chamber, I devoted lots of time to the assisted dying debate, poring over heart-wrenching letters, and speaking with constituents and professionals on both sides of the argument. That debate showed me that, whatever views people hold, we need far more focus, discussion and funding for care at the end of life. When hospices have to cut their services, the people who need them do not just disappear; instead, they go to the NHS, or they are among the quarter of people who could benefit from specialist end-of-life care but never receive it. With stable long-term funding that reflects the full costs of specialist services, hospices could not only maintain their services, but expand their role to meet growing demand and the various challenges ahead of us. We all deserve a good death, but many of us do not get that. That must and can change, and I look forward to working with everyone in this Chamber, and with the incredible people who provide palliative care, to ensure that it does.

• 2 Feb 2026 · Indefinite Leave to Remain · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan) for opening the debate so thoughtfully. I also thank the petitioners for enabling us to debate this issue. Some 96% of my constituents in Cannock Chase were born in the UK, yet immigration is one of the issues most frequently raised with me. It is a topic of debate that matters to and affects people right across the country. In recent years, rhetoric around immigration has led to a fundamental misunderstanding of the motivations of many people who choose to make Britain their home. At the same time, legitimate concerns about the impact of migration on communities, particularly when that migration is rapid, have been dismissed as bigotry. That leads only to resentment, entrenchment and toxicity, so I am glad that we are having an open and respectful debate. As always, I am keen to hear a range of views, particularly from those who will be affected by the things that we discuss in this place. Two weeks ago, I met faith leaders and members of the congregation of the Victory church in Rugeley, most of whom work in health and social care. What they shared with me was not opposition to reform but a need for clarity and reassurance. They could see why change is needed, and they support the concept of contribution—they believe that they are making a contribution in many different ways—but the proposal that people in so-called “lower-skilled roles” could face qualifying periods of up to 15 years is causing concern, particularly for those in social care. The people I met pointed out that social care requires extensive training, safeguarding responsibilities, emotional resilience and compassion, but often is not well paid, meaning that they will not reach the income thresholds under the Government’s contribution proposals. They are not asking for special treatment. They made a constructive suggestion: could those who demonstrate a long-term commitment to care work and continued professional development have access to quicker settlement? I hope that the Minister will say something about how the contribution of social care workers, in particular, can be recognised. The issue I heard about loudest, though, was the need for transitional arrangements. People have understandably planned their lives around the expectation of ILR after five years, so I hope that the Minister can give us some clarity on when we will know what the arrangements will be. Uncertainty is affecting families’ ability to plan. My constituent Solomon works in social care. His daughter is currently doing her GCSEs and recently won an award for academic excellence. He fears that, on the brink of getting ILR, his family could face a decade or more of uncertainty.

• 27 Jan 2026 · Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  At its heart, this Bill is about fairness—fairness for the doctors who train in this country, and fairness for the patients who rely on the care provided by our fantastic NHS workforce. Before Brexit, graduates from our British medical schools predominantly competed among themselves for foundation and specialty training posts, but since Boris Johnson’s disastrous visa and immigration changes made under the previous Conservative Government, that picture has changed completely. Doctors trained here are facing huge barriers to progressing their career and caring for patients up and down the country, and many are turning to jobs abroad or within the private sector. That is not because they lack the ability or the commitment, but because of how the system was left to drift by the previous Government until it has got to this point of being set up against our graduates. We hear a lot about the doctors who train here but then end up going abroad, but we hear a lot less about the concerns of the doctors who remain here in the UK. They are passionate about our NHS and want to dedicate their careers to it. They want to build their lives here, but all too often they find that they simply cannot secure a training post. This is not a new problem; it is a reality that has been behind the flight of doctors overseas for many years. But only now do we have a Government who are committed to tackling it. I commend the Health Secretary not only for bringing forward the Bill, but for committing to bring in changes as swiftly as possible. Our NHS and our constituents are missing out on our home-grown talent because of the previous Government’s changes to immigration, which led to the so-called Boriswave. As we have heard, international medical graduates contribute hugely and are welcome, but visa changes have had a destabilising effect on British-trained doctors who now face double the competition for every single post. We are training more doctors now than ever before, but we have failed until now to match that ambition with a system that supports them. As we have heard, we spend around £4 billion a year training doctors in the UK, a huge investment of public money, and it is only right that taxpayers see that investment translating into doctors building their careers in our NHS. The prioritisation to which the Secretary of State referred is about sustainability and keeping things fair for our UK-trained graduates, not about shutting out international talent. The NHS is rightly proud to be a major international employer and people from around the world will continue to bring vital skills to our health service. Of course, anyone who can apply now will still be able to apply. But many countries from which we are recruiting also desperately need their own doctors. We should be proud that people want to come and work here, but it is morally unacceptable to pinch doctors from other countries that need them, meanwhile leaving our brilliant and willing resident doctors unable to get training places. The Bill builds on action that the Government have already taken to boost the NHS workforce. When the Government came into office, we heard concerns from GPs and patients alike about a dire need for more GP surgery capacity, while many qualified GPs were out of work. Labour removed the red tape around the additional roles reimbursement scheme and more than 1,000 additional GPs have since joined our primary care workforce. When the Government heard from nurses who were just about to qualify and struggling to find work, despite a clear and chronic need for more nurses, they brought in the graduate guarantee. Now the Government are acting again. Following the Secretary of State’s constructive approach to negotiations with the BMA, he offered a package of support, including quadrupling the number of specialist training posts being created in the coming three years and funding resident doctors’ Royal College exam and membership fees. Despite a rejection of that deal, he is making good on his commitment to put British graduates back on a level playing field, giving them a fair shot at taking the next step in their careers, with competition ratios that are reasonable and workable. The Bill will ensure that the NHS retains the talent it has developed through excellent medical schools such as Keele University in Staffordshire, rather than losing that talent to overseas recruitment or forcing doctors out of the profession altogether. The BMA has welcomed extending prioritisation to the foundation programme, which the Government expect will significantly reduce the number of placeholder offers faced by final-year medical students. I hope that as their members vote on whether to take further strike action, they will see that the Government do not make pie-crust promises. We are taking the steps we said we would take to fix the issues that they have raised. I know that the Bill will not fix every workforce challenge overnight, but it is certainly a big step in the right direction. It will reduce competition for training places and, most importantly, send a clear message to resident doctors who trained in this country: if you want to progress your career here, the Government will back you. For those reasons, I am proud to support the Bill.

• 26 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T2. My constituent, Julie, a single mum of two, had a successful career in marketing, but had to quit after battling with depression, stemming from undiagnosed attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Julie has been stuck in a cycle of struggling to get treatment and diagnosis on the NHS and having to go back to work before she is ready—a story that is sadly echoed among many of my constituents who struggle with fragmented mental health services and a lack of employment support due to cuts made by the previous Government. Will the Minister update the House on the work that she is doing with her counterparts in the Department of Health and Social Care, to ensure people struggling with mental ill health can recover and get back to work?

• 26 Jan 2026 · NHS Urgent Care: Staffordshire · Hansard source

  More

  I saw a post from my hon. Friend on Facebook earlier today about this very matter. I know that he is fighting very hard on that on behalf of his constituents. I hope that my integrated care board listens to the concerns of my constituents, and I hope that that is reflected in Coventry and Warwickshire and that he can get some progress on a doctor-led unit. For the past six years, people in Cannock Chase have had to travel to Stafford, Lichfield, Walsall or Wolverhampton for care that they would once have accessed locally. That is not simply an inconvenience; it undermines the objectives of urgent care reform, increases pressure on neighbouring hospitals and pushes more people into A&E. That is exactly the opposite of what the urgent care review is supposed to achieve. Most worrying of all are those who are not seeking care at all. Not everybody can drive and not everyone has access to reliable public transport, particularly in places such as Staffordshire. When patients are faced with long, complicated journeys for what should be straightforward local treatment, many simply put it off; conditions then worsen, complications develop and people ultimately end up needing an ambulance for something that could have been treated earlier, more cheaply and closer to home. At the engagement events and in conversations with me since, constituents have told me that the MIU was a lifeline when they did not need A&E but their GP felt they needed to go to hospital. Cannock Chase hospital is very close to a bus station, and most people locally can catch a single bus to reach it; in contrast, travelling by bus to MIUs in Lichfield, Stafford, Walsall or Wolverhampton can be difficult, often involving multiple changes and long journey times. As a result, many of my constituents are paying for taxis instead, which is a significant financial burden. The issue becomes even clearer when we look at the demographics of my constituency. It has a slightly older population than the national average, with more than 19,500 residents aged 65 and over—around a fifth of our population. Almost half of those older residents—more than 9,300 people—are living with a long-term health condition, a higher proportion than we see nationally. These are the residents who are most likely to need timely urgent care, who are more vulnerable to deterioration if treatment is delayed, and who often face the greatest barriers when services are not available locally. The NHS’s own data shows higher attendances at both surrounding MIUs since ours closed, but not by the total amount of previous activity at Cannock Chase hospital, backing up what residents have been telling us about not always seeking care. We can also see how these pressures play out in practice at nearby hospitals that many of my constituents rely on when local urgent care is not available. Although Royal Stoke University hospital is not in my constituency, it is a key part of the wider system and serves residents right across our county. In the final quarter of last year alone, that hospital saw more than 33,000 A&E attendances, and over 6,800 patients waited more than 12 hours to be admitted or discharged. That is more than one in five attendances—double the national average—placing the hospital among the most pressured in the country.

• 26 Jan 2026 · NHS Urgent Care: Staffordshire · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend and fellow Staffordshire MP for his intervention. He has highlighted a critical point: every part of our NHS can have a knock-on effect on the others, so the system needs to work as a whole. We cannot just focus on individual services; we have to see how it works in the round. That is what the review is trying to do, but of course, many of us feel it is not hitting on what it needs to. I do not raise these figures to criticise staff, who are working under immense strain, or the Government, who are making strong progress on addressing the pressures I have described. I raise them to underline a simple point: as we have heard, when local urgent care is unavailable, demand does not disappear, it is concentrated elsewhere. Making sure patients get the right care in the right place is critical—too many people end up in A&E not because they need to be there, but because there is nowhere else for them to go. Perhaps in the past, our MIU was not always used for its intended purpose, but even that was often a symptom of failings in community care. Urgent treatment centres will be a vital part of the fabric of our NHS, sitting between primary care and emergency departments. Not having that service for a population of over 100,000 people is a real challenge, and it weakens the wider system. In the 17 months since the review of urgent care was unveiled, I have had many conversations with our ICB about urgent care more broadly, as have GPs, councillors and campaigners. I know that they are putting in place services that make good on the Government’s commitment to shift care from hospitals out into the community. I welcome the introduction of a wound care local enhanced service, which recognises that wound care was previously a key reason for patients to access the MIU, even though their homes are a better place for that care to take place. This shows that sustained conversations about our local health needs and inequalities are starting to translate into results. I hope that building on this, Cannock Chase can be a forerunner in the roll-out of multidisciplinary neighbourhood teams. The health inequalities we sadly have locally, coupled with the distance to many secondary care services that I have referred to, means that we would benefit hugely from that model of supercharged community care. Better than having to catch a bus to Lichfield or Stafford would be heading to Cannock Chase hospital, but better still would be getting that care at home. That is what I am calling for, and will continue to fight for, on behalf of my constituents. There are areas where Staffordshire is performing strongly. Urgent community response services are exceeding national targets, winter planning has helped to stabilise hospital stays during periods of peak demand, and vaccination programmes are having an impact on admissions. This is not an argument against reform; it is an argument for consistency and fairness. If urgent care reform is about reducing avoidable A&E attendance, improving patient flow and ensuring equitable access across the system, then Cannock Chase cannot continue to remain an outlier. Crucially, this is not just about rhetoric. The Government are making huge strides in the NHS nationally, backed by reform, investment and a determination to ensure that people get the right care in the right place at the right time. That is why I welcome the investment already being made in the Chadsmoor medical practice, the Rawnsley surgery and the Red Lion surgery in my constituency. That will make a huge difference to people’s everyday experience of the NHS that they can see and feel. Strengthening primary care does not remove the need for local urgent care—one cannot simply replace the other. My ask today is simple and constructive. I am not asking the Minister to pre-empt the outcome of the ICB’s review—I know that she cannot do that—and I am certainly not arguing against the reform of urgent care that prompted this review. I am calling for clarity, fairness and alignment between national ambition and local delivery. If we believe in shifting care out of hospitals and into communities, if we believe in reducing avoidable A&E attendance and if we believe in equitable access to urgent care, then Cannock Chase must have that as part of its future. I hope that 2026 can be the year that sees an expansion of urgent care back into my part of the world, and I urge the Royal Wolverhampton NHS trust to make better use of Cannock Chase hospital, which many residents feel remains underutilised compared with how things were under the former Mid Staffordshire NHS trust. I would welcome the Minister’s assurance that local voices will continue to be properly heard, that decisions will be communicated clearly and promptly, and that the Government will work with the Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent ICB to ensure that communities such as mine are not left without urgent care provision. Urgent care, at its simplest, is about whether someone with a broken wrist, a deep cut or a worsening infection knows where to go and can actually get there. I look forward to continuing to work constructively with the ICB, the Minister and colleagues across the House to ensure that urgent care in Staffordshire truly works for the communities that we all serve.

• 26 Jan 2026 · NHS Urgent Care: Staffordshire · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful for the opportunity to lead this debate on NHS urgent care in my brilliant county of Staffordshire, and particularly on what that means for my constituents in the towns and villages of Cannock Chase. I start by paying immense tribute to the dedicated staff who work in our NHS and in social care. From district nurses and general practice, through to care homes and A&E departments, the passion and expertise that they bring enriches and saves lives. When I was elected, I knew that there were many local issues that I would need to get to grips with quickly, but among many priorities, I knew that I had to campaign on urgent healthcare first. It is a subject that my constituents have raised with me frequently, on doorsteps, in emails, at surgeries and in conversations with local clinicians. It goes right to the heart of whether people feel confident that our NHS will be there for them when they need it, and that our area is well served. Before being elected to serve Cannock Chase, I worked in the NHS, not in a clinical role but in communications, and that experience has very much stayed with me. It means that I approach debates like this with a great deal of respect for the people working in the system, and with an understanding of just how complex it is. I know how difficult decisions can be, how stretched staff are and how long it can take to move from strategy to delivery, but I also know that delay and uncertainty have consequences for patients, staff morale and public trust. For my constituents, uncertainty around access to urgent care has become an all too familiar experience. The minor injuries unit at Cannock Chase hospital was temporarily closed in March 2020, so that staff could be redeployed to the covid wards at New Cross hospital. At the time that decision was entirely understandable and widely supported locally. The NHS was facing an unprecedented emergency and staff stepped up in extraordinary ways to protect lives. At the same time, it was said that the closure was temporary and that the Royal Wolverhampton NHS trust planned to reopen the MIU once pandemic-related workforce pressures eased, but, nearly six years on, that temporary closure feels anything but temporary. In fact, two years after the closure, in March 2022, there was significant fanfare around the possibility of a reopening that summer. Many residents understandably took that as a sign of progress, but ultimately nothing came of it. After more than two years of radio silence, in August 2024 the Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent integrated care board announced a wholesale review of urgent care services across the county, in the light of new national standards for urgent treatment centres. Although the proposals are to upgrade urgent care facilities in other hospitals in Stafford, Burton-upon-Trent, Lichfield, Tamworth and Stoke-on-Trent to meet those UTC standards, they included the permanent closure of Cannock’s minor injuries unit, which would effectively end the remaining hope among my constituents and others in neighbouring constituencies that urgent care will come back to our area. The reasons given included a belief that need from the Cannock Chase area was already being met by other nearby hospitals and, above all, a refusal from the Royal Wolverhampton NHS trust to support urgent care provision at Cannock Chase hospital. A comment made to me by a member of the ICB’s staff was, “They just aren’t interested”. The way that these proposals were communicated locally was very poor, and I have been very frank with the ICB about that. The reaction of the people who saw the ICB’s document was understandably one of huge concern, particularly among older residents, people with chronic conditions and those who cannot drive. The ICB planned only one public engagement event in my constituency, which was in the afternoon on a weekday, and even that attracted far more people than it had planned for. Although many did not get to hear about the event, the room was still packed, and very frank views were given. At my request, the ICB held a second event, which was on an evening, and I am told that that was well attended too. We were told that the ICB expected to take its final proposals to health scrutiny at Staffordshire county council in the spring of last year, with a full public consultation in the summer if the committee deemed it necessary, yet months passed without any update, adding to the uncertainty and frustration locally. Let me be clear that I am not standing here to criticise the ICB for the sake of it; I meet it regularly, and at those meetings we have serious, detailed discussions about patient flow, demand, workforce and outcomes. I understand that good decision making in the NHS takes time, but I believe that prolonged uncertainty comes at a cost. Every month that passes without clarity leaves patients unsure where to go when they need care, staff unsure what the future holds for their workplace, and communities feeling that decisions are being made far away, rather than with an understanding of local reality.

• 18 Dec 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  The excitement in the run-up to Christmas has been tempered this year by a particularly nasty outbreak of flu and respiratory syncytial virus. My one-year-old was very ill with RSV in recent weeks, and my husband and I had a real scare when our GP told us that he needed to be taken into hospital. After brilliant care in paediatric A&E, I am delighted to say that he is back to babbling at us and pushing everything with wheels around the house. It was another powerful reminder of the incredible care that our NHS staff give every single day of the year. Will the Leader of the House join me in thanking the dedicated staff at West Midlands ambulance service and Walsall Manor hospital, and join me in wishing all our NHS staff a very merry Christmas?

• 10 Dec 2025 · Resident Doctors: Industrial Action · Hansard source

  More

  I too thank the Secretary of State for the lengths he is going to for resident doctors. As somebody who worked in our NHS before coming to this place, I know what a pressured time winter is for staff and patients alike. With strikes at this time of year, NHS staff will this week be taking calls from harried managers and cancelling plans to be with their families at Christmas to cover shifts, and of course patients will have their operations cancelled. Does he share my concern about the human impact of this planned strike?

• 27 Nov 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  The end of November is nigh, so dodgy moustaches across the land will finally disappear—but not before thousands of us MoBros have raised millions for Movember, which does brilliant and much-needed work for men’s health. Donations are still gratefully received, of course. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating all MoBros across the House and beyond, as well as everybody who has raised money for men’s health this month, and will he grant time for a debate on the three missions of Movember: mental health, prostate cancer and testicular cancer awareness?

• 20 Nov 2025 · International Men’s Day · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered International Men’s Day, the issues affecting, and contributions made by, men and boys, and what it means to be a man in Britain today. It is an honour to lead this debate, and I am grateful to the Backbench Business Committee for granting time for the House to consider this important issue. I also thank Members from across the House who supported the application and recognise the need for a serious national conversation about men’s health, men’s wellbeing and modern masculinity. This year marks the 10th anniversary of our International Men’s Day debate—a chance for us to celebrate men and commit to tackling the challenges they face head on. For me, being a man means being there for family and friends, particularly when they need support the most. It means being the best dad and husband that I can be and, perhaps most importantly, being a completely fallible human being. But let’s face it: you do not need to be an expert to know that being a man in Britain today can be very tough. We hear that from the men in our own families, on our street and in our workplace. Mental health issues are on the rise, preventable killers such as heart disease and prostate cancer are being caught too late and, most shockingly of all, suicide remains the leading cause of death for men under 50—something that I know many hon. Members wish to focus on today. With that backdrop, many men and boys are turning to online influencers who promote a particular, reductive view about what being a “real man” is, but that rarely gives them any sense of hope or optimism about their future and role in society. The uncomfortable truth is that men often do not ask for help. For generations, we have been taught that a stiff upper lip, sorting yourself out and manning up is the best response to life’s challenges. When we combine that with higher rates of addiction of various types, it is no wonder that men’s health has reached a crisis point, and that hits families, workplaces and our communities. That is why the first ever men’s health strategy for England, published yesterday, is so welcome. I commend the Government and all the organisations involved in writing it for listening to what men need and not shying away from tackling issues that affect men specifically. The strategy will mean that we meet men where they are to break down enduring stigma around mental health. It will improve care for men with prostate cancer and will support ex-miners, like those in my constituency, with better NHS diagnosis and treatment for people at high risk of respiratory disease. It is the first serious effort to understand the problems that men face and to chart the path to a country where men and boys can live longer, healthier and happier lives. As the first speaker, I want, as best I can, to set the scene for the discussion and highlight the breadth of issues affecting men and boys across the UK, from health and education to employment, fatherhood and social wellbeing. Today we will touch on the challenges men face at every stage of life, celebrate the contributions they make to their families and communities, and home in on what we can do to shift things in the right direction. I particularly thank the Dad Shift campaign for its support in shaping today’s debate. Its campaign for better paternity leave, backed by undeniable evidence, is grounded in lived experience. The Daft Shift is also the reason you might expect one or two dad jokes this afternoon, Madam Deputy Speaker. I will go into the campaign in more detail later, but I want to kick things off with one of my favourites: “Scientists have found that dairy cows give a better yield when farmers talk to them. It’s a case of in one ear, out the udder.” Madam Deputy Speaker, I was tempted to put “pause for laughter” in my speech notes, but I am glad I didn’t — [ Laughter. ] Jokes aside, the challenges we face begin very early in life, with boys lagging behind girls, from school readiness through to further education. This year, 45,000 fewer men under 19 started university compared with their female peers, and boys are disproportionately excluded from school. And let’s say it as it is: white working-class boys are at a particular disadvantage, and not because of a lack of talent but because of the hand they are dealt from birth. Employment outcomes paint a similar picture, with young men making up 62% of those unemployed—that is nearly 1 million men out of work, all while our construction, teaching, healthcare and social care sectors struggle to fill vacancies. Yesterday, More in Common published a report into the disillusionment among many men, particularly those in their 40s and 50s. Some in the media might characterise this as a backlash against feminism, but what is actually behind it is men feeling that their lives are out of control. No matter how hard they work, they cannot provide the security and opportunities they want for their families. They cannot plan for the future, so it is no wonder they feel vulnerable and let down, particularly by politics and politicians. Their priorities are unsurprisingly very similar to the general public: daily pressures, like the cost of living, insecure work, unaffordable housing and high levels of immigration, all combine into a sense that the system is rigged against them and in favour of those who are already privileged. Loneliness and poor mental health are an inevitable consequence—particularly concerning given that middle-aged men are among the least likely to seek help either from professionals or their peers. Just as men take on more and more pressures and responsibilities, many find that their social circles shrink. Community groups like Andy’s Man Club and Stand By Me in my constituency have such a vital role to play. They work tirelessly to give men that non-judgmental space to meet others in a similar position and know that they are far from alone. On that note, International Men’s Day should be an opportunity to smash through stigma. One taboo that I believe still persists among men is being the victim of sexual harassment and assault. Breaking the silence can mean those of us in privileged positions telling our stories, so here is mine. Around 10 years ago, I went on a night out in an unfamiliar city with a group of friends. I was very conscious not to overdo it because if I got separated from the group, I wanted to be able to find my way back to the hotel. I remember going to a few bars and having a good time, but then it is a complete blank, which is something I have never experienced before or since. The next morning, I woke up with the worst headache I have ever had. The man I was sharing the hotel room with commented that he had had a great night but I had overdone it a bit and needed to be looked after. That did not seem to tally with my being determined to pace myself, but I thought maybe I had drunk too much, and I just wanted to get home and sleep it off. What followed in the days after was constant text messages from this man, initially just asking whether I was okay but then repeatedly asking what I remembered and commenting that I was a “great shag”. That made me freeze because I had no recollection of getting back to the hotel, let alone anything else, and he had repeatedly told me how out of it I had been, so how could I have ever consented? It took me a few weeks to piece together my memories, the blanks, the text messages, and this man’s insistent tone. Obviously, I cut myself off from contact, but it took me a long time to admit, even to myself, that I was a victim of rape. I never felt able to report this and face the likely conclusion that, months on from that night, there was not the tangible evidence to ever bring a charge, and I will probably always carry a bit of guilt around that. I found myself processing all of this with thoughts like “I count myself lucky that I was unconscious when it happened”, but I want to say clearly today that no victim should ever feel that they have to put themselves in a hierarchy or feel any shame. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] It is the people who do this to another person who should feel shame, and I hope that we can foster an atmosphere where men have the courage to speak out about this and seek justice, even if it is a hard road. I realise that this is a very heavy topic, so I would like to end on one that brings me and so many men a huge amount of joy: fatherhood. The vast majority of dads want to play a bigger role in raising their children than previous generations did. The traditional role of protecting and providing is still there, but more and more, dads are clear that providing also means their children benefiting from their presence as much as possible. Right now, we have the least generous statutory paternity leave in Europe at just two weeks, and at less than half the minimum wage, with nothing at all for self-employed dads. One stat that I find shocking is that 90% of paternity leave claims are made by those with above average incomes and far more is claimed in London than the rest of the country. That is a stark class divide and certainly not what the last Labour Government envisaged when paternity leave was introduced. A poll by Movember found that 62% of new dads struggled under financial pressure and a third take no leave at all. It is no wonder that recovery times for mums with birth complications are getting longer and mental ill health among new dads is on the rise. This is the future of our country that we are talking about, and we deserve so much better than this. Before I sit down, since I am in such good company, I will tell one more dad joke. I went into B&Q recently and asked for some nails. The assistant asked me how long I wanted them. I said, “Well, I was planning to keep them.” [Laughter.] Maybe I could have paused for laughter on that one. Let me end on this: supporting men and boys is not a fringe issue, or an issue for men alone. Say this loud and proud: a society that helps men to be healthy, hopeful and present is a society that works better for women too. Want stronger families, better relationships and happier communities? Lifting up men and boys is part of the solution. Men who protect and provide should not be shamed; they should be celebrated. To my fellow men, I say, “If you are ever struggling with anything at all, just know that we will hear you and be there for you.” International Men’s Day is a reminder that change is possible, and it is necessary.

• 19 Nov 2025 · Suicide: Reducing the Stigma · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mr Mundell. I thank the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) for securing the debate, and I thank hon. Members for their powerful speeches and interventions. I start by wishing everybody a happy International Men’s Day. It is a great opportunity to reflect on the contributions made by men and boys, and a chance to talk seriously about men’s mental health and wellbeing. All of which, I hope we will continue to do tomorrow in the Backbench Business debate on International Men’s Day, which I have the honour of leading this year. I hope all hon. Members who are able to will join us. One issue we cannot shy away from is suicide. As we have heard, it remains one of the leading causes of death for men under 50, which is a heartbreaking and unacceptable reality. This morning, as I scrolled through Instagram, I came across a video of Clarke Carlisle speaking to the Health Secretary. He said something that struck me deeply: “There is no situation that is irretrievable other than a completed suicide.” That is a powerful reminder that every moment before crisis is a moment when a life can still be saved. That is something I can relate to personally, as I have suffered throughout my life with mental ill health and probably always will. In the past, I have felt that the world would be a better place without me. I will be honest and say that has been the case even in the past 12 months. I have not said that out loud to many people, but in debates like this, I think we should be as open as possible in the hope that it helps others and shows that mental ill health and suicide can touch all of us, no matter what position we are in or what walk of life we come from. As always, our NHS is there to care for us in our most desperate moments and to help us recover, but for so many, that is sadly not the reality when it comes to mental health. That is why I am proud that today the Government have published the first ever mental health strategy. I wholeheartedly welcome it and think we should be very proud of it. In particular, I welcome the commitment of £3.6 million over three years for suicide prevention projects that are focused on middle-aged men, particularly those in the most deprived communities where the risks are highest; the partnership with the Premier League and the Samaritans, through the Together Against Suicide initiative, which will embed mental health messaging directly into the matchday experience, where many men already feel at home; and the expansion of mental health teams in schools, so that nearly 1 million more young people will have access to early support by 2026. I particularly commend the Government’s approach of involving the Premier League, because we must do everything we can to reach out to men who have previously felt isolated from discussions around mental health. Let us face it: those discussions can sometimes feel too full of expectation and pressure or can be too medicalised, rather than meeting men where they are by using language and settings with which they already feel comfortable and familiar. The reality is that, for many, it is hard to be a man in today’s society. Many men feel overwhelmed by stress, financial pressures and expectations of being a provider, a protector and a pillar of strength. They feel as though they are failing in those roles, not because they are failing as men but because the structures around them have stopped giving them support. This morning, I went to a briefing from More in Common, which has produced a fantastic report on how men across the country are feeling. It told us that nine in 10 disillusioned men feel that politicians do not care about places like theirs; seven in 10 believe that no matter how hard they work, they will never be able to improve their circumstances; some feel that they no longer have any good friends to rely on; and many do not feel proud of their community. Many men feel that debates about masculinity and gender cast them as the problem, never just as people trying to get by in life and partners in building a better society. That matters for suicide prevention because a man who feels he has no control over his life, who feels isolated and that he is failing the people he loves, is a man who is more vulnerable to crisis. The path to suicide often begins not with one traumatic moment but with a long erosion of purpose, belonging and hope. That is why we must continue to promote male-focused approaches to building positive attitudes towards mental health to help to restore a sense of a man’s role in society and to create spaces and conversations about wellbeing that genuinely work for men. That is one of the many reasons why initiatives such as men’s sheds, Andy’s Man Club and Stand By Me, which is a local group in my constituency, have been so effective. In the world of farming, the Farm Safety Foundation does incredible work through its Yellow Wellies campaign. I only wish that our farmers did not have the dark cloud of the proposed changes to inheritance tax hanging over them. Many men describe support groups as feeling like a family and a community where they can be honest and hear someone say, “It’s not just you,” and “You’re not alone.” If we want to reduce the stigma associated with suicide, we must recognise that mental health is not isolated from everything else in a man’s life. Financial security matters, sense of belonging matters, community matters and conversation matters. Men need spaces where they feel safe to talk long before they reach a crisis point. Strength is not found in silence, and courage is not found in pretending that everything is fine. I hope that we can continue this conversation and make today’s International Men’s Day the start of a really positive set of actions, so that men do not reach that irreversible point of crisis.

• 27 Oct 2025 · Statutory Maternity and Paternity Pay · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to speak with you in the Chair, Mrs Hobhouse. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Burton and Uttoxeter (Jacob Collier) for introducing this petition so thoughtfully, and I thank Grace Carter and the more than 100,000 signatories. For too many families, including in my constituency, our parental leave system simply does not work. In many households, especially in rural or more deprived areas, where wages are lower and transport costs are often higher, taking one’s full entitlement of parental leave is unaffordable. It is little wonder that one in three dads take no leave at all when their baby arrives, and we know the consequences of that. Around two in five births are by caesarean section, a procedure requiring considerable recovery time. In a constituency such as mine, that could mean being stuck at home without the support of family, friends or a partner. Those early weeks can be isolating, and that is before we add in the exhaustion and recovery from major surgery. That is the value of paternity leave to new mums. On pay, so many young people are putting off starting a family because of the sheer cost of parenthood. When I speak to people my age, many women feel that they must return to work even before their nine months of maternity pay comes to an end. On the cost for employers, if we frame this in the context of staff morale, the conversation shifts to being about the cost of the system as it is now. What is it doing to fathers’ mental health and productivity at work when they are not able to take time off with their children? As part of the ongoing review into parental leave, which I am so proud of, I urge the Minister to consider the arguments and evidence of campaigners such as the Dad Shift, Pregnant Then Screwed and thousands of families up and down this country. Paternity and maternity pay should not push families into poverty, but provide proper time for parents to be parents.

• 21 Oct 2025 · NHS Menopause Treatment · Hansard source

  More

  Earlier this year, a constituent came to speak to me about shortages of the one hormone replacement therapy drug that was working for her after years of misdiagnoses and ineffective treatment. She told me that GPs have very low awareness of menopause and often recommend alternatives that cause adverse reactions, leaving her and many other women paying for private advice and treatment and taking time off work. Will the Minister update the House on what the Department is doing to address HRT shortages and to improve training for GPs so that millions of women get the support that they need?

• 21 Oct 2025 · NHS Menopause Treatment · Hansard source

  More

  15. What steps he is taking to ensure that women have access to menopause treatments on the NHS.