Kevin Bonavia MP: speeches

Speeches

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  On Second Reading, I voted in favour of the Bill, partly because I believed in the principle of it—I believe the right to choice, and in the right not to choose—and partly because I believed that we needed to have a way of checking somebody’s clear intention. At the moment, horrible deaths are happening and there are no such checks in place, so I was keen to see how this House could come up with a system that, although it would not be perfect, would be better than the terrible status quo we have now. At that stage, we had two checks by medical practitioners, and then a third layer: the involvement of a High Court judge. Although I was pleased with a third layer, I was not convinced that it was the right way to deal with the matter. I am therefore pleased that that the Bill Committee proposed a panel of experts to make those checks, and the right hon. and learned Member for Kenilworth and Southam (Sir Jeremy Wright) has rightly addressed some of those points. For me, having that panel in place is very important, and it is our job to see how we can strengthen it, so I want to speak to amendments 78 and 79. Amendment 78 would improve this provision by ensuring that there is a unanimous decision in favour of a certificate of eligibility—abstentions would not apply. That is better than what was previously drafted and is certainly better than a High Court judge. Amendment 79 would require those reasons to be set out in writing. There will be scrutiny of those decisions and we do need to have the reasons properly set out. I appreciate that all hon. Members in the Chamber, and all those who have taken part in this process, have approached it with the best of intentions. It is not easy—it is difficult—and we have constituents giving us examples from both sides. We are doing the best we can to alleviate people’s suffering—that, I hope, is our common intention across the House.

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is right to think about the impact of restrictions. Today we are all trying, in our different ways, to improve the Bill, whether we believe in it in principle or not. I believe that the amendments to which I am speaking would improve the Bill. As we all think carefully about the different parts of the Bill, we should ask ourselves this question: would it make things better than the status quo? I believe that it would. I believe that there would be fewer horrible, painful deaths. The amendments help in that direction. I remain a supporter of the Bill, and ask other hon. Members to think carefully too.

• 6 Mar 2025 · National Resilience · Hansard source

  More

  The covid inquiry found that years of under-investment under the Conservatives meant that our health services were already struggling to cope even before covid struck, with waiting lists rising years before the pandemic. Does my right hon. Friend agree that investing in our NHS and tackling the terrible delays that patients, including many of my constituents in Stevenage, experience in receiving treatment are vital to improving our country’s resilience?

• 4 Dec 2024 · Employer National Insurance Contributions · Hansard source

  More

  I totally agree with my hon. Friend that this Government are supporting people across the whole country, including Scotland today, and I really hope the Scottish Government use the money they have been given well. Returning to the Opposition motion, were they also opposed to our country being left a £22 billion black hole by the last Government? Where they also opposed to the disastrous Liz Truss mini-Budget, which included £45 billion of unfunded tax cuts, and which shocked the markets, crashed the pound and skyrocketed mortgage rates? Were they also opposed to the last Government’s spring Budget, which included myriad damaging unfunded promises in an attempt to flash the cash at the public ahead of an election? If they do now oppose all the above, they must agree with me that we have to restore economic stability by funding our pledges. That means finding money, and if it is not through this measure, would they tax working people or make another black hole? We have to face down the reality of these choices for what they are. It is overwhelmingly clear that the shadow Cabinet, who were exiled into opposition this summer, have not learned a single thing. They have made £6.7 billion in unfunded spending commitments in just four weeks. At least we can be grateful that they are not in the position to do more damage at the moment. Turning to what the funds raised from this measure will do, are the Opposition opposed to investing an extra £25.6 billion to fix the foundations of our NHS or cutting waiting times with 40,000 extra elective appointments a week?

• 2 Dec 2024 · Children and Bereavement · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered e-petitions 636718 and 624185 relating to children and bereavement. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. This is my first time opening a debate as a new member of the Petitions Committee; I am delighted to speak to the two incredibly important petitions. Before I begin, I want to thank the House of Commons staff for enabling me to engage proactively with the petitioners, charities, advocates, representatives and supporters involved in both petitions. I feel privileged to stand here today as an advocate for the campaigners who have worked tirelessly for years to get results on these vital matters. This debate takes place during National Grief Awareness week, which is run by the Good Grief Trust, who chose this year’s theme: shine a light. That is exactly what I hope to do today in this debate. First, I would like to set out the two matters at hand before I make the case for each. Crucial in all of this is that both petitions go hand in hand in with the same diagnosis and cure, which I will describe. I will delve into it further towards the end of my speech. I want to start with the petition entitled, “Record the number of bereaved children to ensure they are supported”. That might not be something we would consider every day, but currently we do not know how many bereaved children there are in the UK right now. The petition argues: “If we don’t know the true scale of childhood bereavement, the services that exist to help are unable to proactively offer the support that children and their families need to cope with their grief. Without support, unresolved grief in young people can lead to an increased risk of youth offending, family breakdown, underachievement in education and employment and long-term mental health conditions.” I want to thank Winston’s Wish and its inspiring ambassador, Mark Lemon, for the work that they have done submitting the petition and campaigning for it over the years. One of the fundamental reasons why I am in favour of it is Mark’s own personal story, which I am deeply grateful to be able to share on his behalf today. At age 12, Mark experienced the horrific murder of his father. With nothing registered and no real support around at the time, Mark received no help to cope with that traumatic incident or adjust to the massive impact that the loss had on his life until his 20s. Mark is here today, and he argues that recording the number of children in the household when a death is registered could help thousands of bereaved children and ensure that services can better plan, reach out to families and offer much-needed support. Mark is working hard to make sure that no child faces the isolation he did after such devastation, which is hard for any of us to fathom even as adults. Setting aside the emotional aspect of the argument, I support the practicalities of the proposal. From service delivery to charities, local councils and schools, how can anybody work to tackle the consequences of childhood bereavement if no one knows where it is occurring in the first place?

• 19 Nov 2024 · NHS Health and Social Care Reform · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for his earlier answer. Last week, I spoke to one of my constituents, Norman Phillips, who has been an unpaid carer for his wife Ros for the past 18 years. Like many unpaid carers across Stevenage, Norman has been put through absolute hell by the previous Tory Government’s complete inaction on social care for over 14 years. Does the Secretary of State agree that unpaid carers such as Norman play a vital role in providing care, and that unpaid carers need to be at the heart of any reforms to the social care system—reforms that are much needed?

• 19 Nov 2024 · NHS Health and Social Care Reform · Hansard source

  More

  22. What plans he has to reform NHS health and social care services.

• 5 Nov 2024 · Income Tax (Charge) · Hansard source

  More

  I want to start by saying that we cannot and should not ever underestimate the power and strength of the message that having our Budget delivered by the first female Chancellor in history sends to young women and girls across the country. There should be no limit to their ambition. In Stevenage and across the country, 14 years of Conservative rule have left a crippling cost of living crisis, record NHS waiting lists, rapidly reducing school funding and worsening public transport. I could go on, but I represent a town of aspiration. The people of my town have had their ambitions and hopes dampened by decline and held back by a broken Britain. However, this Budget sends a clear signal that Labour has started the work of getting politics to work for working people again. One of the Labour manifesto’s most fundamental promises was to fix the foundations of our broken public services. I recently attended a local older persons day hosted by Stevenage borough council, where we talked about pensioners’ priorities. The Budget maintains the triple lock, which will be worth an extra £470 for pensioners next year, on top of the more than £900 they are receiving this year from the same commitment. I spend a lot of time speaking to carers in my area who are looking after loved ones in testing circumstances. This Budget delivers the largest increase in the carer’s allowance since its introduction, starting the work of recognising the huge sacrifice they make. However, I know that this work will be complete only when we fundamentally reform our broken social care system, and I very much look forward to that.

• 5 Nov 2024 · Income Tax (Charge) · Hansard source

  More

  I am afraid not. I represent a constituency with multiple borough and district councils that have borne the brunt of 14 years of Government cuts. This Budget delivers £1.3 billion extra for local councils to provide essential services that are vital to our communities. Fifty per cent of patients in my local NHS trust wait longer than the target treatment times, and 31% wait over four hours to be seen in A&E. Despite the heroism and hard work of NHS staff, something simply has to change. The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care has made the brave decision to stand up and fight for our NHS, boldly supported by our Chancellor. I greatly welcome the shift in focus from sickness to prevention, from analogue to digital, and from hospital to community. This crisis cannot be fixed in one Budget, and it may even take a few Budgets, but at least now there is hope where there was none before.

• 8 Oct 2024 · SEND Provision: East of England · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Jess Asato) for securing the debate on SEND provision in the east of England. Accounts from hon. Members today show acutely that, although we aim to highlight our local situation, there are similarities in issues and themes in SEND provision both regionally and nationally. For me, this subject has been the most spoken about since I was elected Member of Parliament for Stevenage, and for a good reason. I ran an online campaign in my constituency to encourage residents to tell me their SEND provision stories, an unfiltered account of the frontline reality. I used those accounts to raise awareness of issues faced by SEND students and families in a recent Westminster Hall debate on SEND provision in Hertfordshire. I have used subsequent opportunities in the Chamber to lobby Ministers to help address the situation. Ultimately, our primary function as MPs is to elevate the voices of those who elected us to this place. As I did in the last SEND debate I participated in, I want to raise an account from the frontline, which I did not get the chance to highlight last time. A distraught mother told me: “My son was permanently excluded whilst we were awaiting the outcome of his EHCP—which left me to look after a traumatised, out-of-school, six year old, organise a new school, fight for his EHCP, look after my daughter, work my busy job and prepare practically and mentally for a tribunal. With NHS waiting lists for a diagnosis sitting at two years, I eventually funded a diagnosis 10 months later. He was deemed suitable for specialist provision but no places were available.” That family was left traumatised. Such blatant accounts tell a clear story: the diagnosis and EHCP processes are hard to navigate and too slow, and placement in a suitable school is a postcode lottery, where too many cases can easily fall through the net. The problem cannot be fixed by simply holding our local authorities’ feet to the fire. We have to recognise the position they have been put in over the last 14 years, with soaring demand, plummeting budgetary power and mass reductions in staff. I want to thank the frontline staff, who work so hard in tough conditions, to get results for children who deserve an education just as much as their fellow pupils. Their lives and their futures matter.