Paul Davies MP: speeches

Speeches

• 15 Jun 2026 · Brain Cancer · Hansard source

  More

  The simple answer is yes, I totally agree. The hon. Lady has summed it up perfectly. In 2023-24, charities provided 74% of all investment, which of course left just 26% coming from Government. There is a clear link between funding and survival. Investment enables more clinical trials, better patient recruitment and improved access to innovation. I therefore call on the Government to set out how much funding will be ringfenced, and to raise their contribution to between £45 million and £50 million by 2029 in line with the recommendations from Brain Tumour Research. At the same time, we must recognise that funding alone will not deliver the progress we urgently need. The wider research and innovation environment must be reformed so that discoveries progress more efficiently into clinical development and patient access. Discovery research is essential, yet many innovations still fail to cross the translational valley of death, where fragmented, high-risk and unsupported pathways cause breakthroughs to stall. Stronger collaboration between institutions is needed to accelerate early-stage research, and the Government should also clarify the role of UK Research and Innovation within the national cancer plan, given its central contribution to discovery science. In addition, health technology assessment reform is required so that appraisal bodies adopt fairer and more flexible cost-effectiveness thresholds for rare and less survivable cancers, including brain tumours. Patient awareness is essential. As Professor Kathreena Kurian highlighted, many patients are left unaware that they must give consent for their tumour tissue to be used in advanced diagnostics and research. Every eligible patient must have proactive conversations with their clinical team about research opportunities. Greater participation is essential to attract investment, and when trials are easier to set up and recruit for, commercial and academic partners are more likely to set up further studies in the UK. Alongside that, we must address an issue repeatedly raised by patients and families: the right to pursue innovative treatment when standard options have been exhausted. Too many families find themselves travelling abroad, seeking repurposed drugs or raising money online to access treatments. No family should be forced to remortgage their home, empty savings or appeal to strangers online simply to pursue the possibility of more time. These improvements depend on one further requirement: strong national leadership. Currently, no single body within the Government, NHS England or the wider health system holds clear ownership of brain cancer outcomes. Where responsibility is spread everywhere, accountability exists nowhere. Patients deserve to know who is responsible for delivering change. Before I close, I will return to the reason the petition exists. In October 2022, Sarah Bainbridge’s daughter Jess was diagnosed with glioblastoma, an aggressive brain cancer that, until then, her family had never heard of. Jess underwent treatment, including two operations, but her family soon realised that once the standard options were exhausted, very few alternatives remained. Like many other families, they found themselves searching beyond established pathways. Jess died in November 2023. She was just 35 years old, and had three children: Alfred, who was five, and one-year-old twins Billy and Alba. In Sarah’s words: “If I am honest, we have needed Jess every single day since she died, and we still do.” This is not just Jess’s story; it is the story of thousands of families across the UK. Following Jess’s death, Sarah met Georgie Maynard, a young mother living with glioblastoma. Although their circumstances were different, they shared the same frustration: that patients and families were still facing many of the same barriers identified decades earlier. Together, they founded Brain Cancer Justice, not for sympathy or recognition, but to call for urgent change. It was my privilege to meet with Brain Cancer Justice in the lead-up to this debate, and I encourage Ministers to do the same. This should not only be about recognition or reassurance but about ending broken promises, raising ambition and protecting delivery. Patients and families have waited long enough: we must turn “terminal” into “treatable”.

• 15 Jun 2026 · Brain Cancer · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. I use the word again: it is fundamental. Without it, there is no real way forward. We will continue to repeat the same treatments that we have seen for many years. Those treatments are not fully effective, as we know, so we need research to develop new and innovative approaches. I have referred to some statistics, but we have to remember that behind every statistic is a family. Each family are pursuing every available treatment, and all too often they are turning to crowdfunding to travel overseas in search of a cure, because significant barriers continue to block progress here at home. Workforce shortages also limit access to care. Only 40% of patients have a clinical nurse specialist, and there is a 30% shortfall in consultant radiologists. Early-career researchers lack funding and support, which pushes talent away from this field. That is especially damaging because scientists from diverse disciplines are essential for the development of new treatments. System failures also prevent the limited available funding from reaching patients in a meaningful way. Whole-genome sequencing is not routinely available at diagnosis, and access to a clinical trial remains severely restricted.

• 15 Jun 2026 · Brain Cancer · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, I do. At the front end, we need to improve diagnosis. I have personal knowledge of that through my youngest daughter. Unfortunately, it took some time for one of her friends to be diagnosed with this awful disease, and he is now at a similar stage, where it is extremely difficult for him to receive the treatment he needs. Diagnosis is extremely important. Clinicians continue to raise concerns about the collection, storage and use of tumour tissue, despite the fact that it is vital to supporting research and innovation. Unfortunately, NHS trusts differ markedly in capacity and resources, creating a postcode lottery for diagnosis and advanced treatments. As we know, brain tumours are complex; there are more than 100 distinct types, nearly 40% of patients in England are diagnosed in emergency care, and the blood-brain barrier limits the effectiveness of medicines. Such challenges have led many to dismiss tackling brain cancer as “too difficult”. That is clearly still an obstacle. We have to break the view that brain cancer falls into that box. In my meetings with campaigners, patients and families, their frustration with that notion is unmistakable. They know, as we do, that with the right support these barriers can be overcome. The Government have recently announced welcome initiatives, including those in the Rare Cancers Act 2026, the national cancer plan and the brain tumour research consortium, supported by the £13.7 million to unite 48 hospitals, universities, cancer centres and charities in partnership with patients. However, that must be seen as just the first step. Much of this activity simply disburses the remainder of the existing funding pledged, and brain tumours still receive just 3.2% of national cancer research funding.

• 18 Mar 2026 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q9. NHS waiting list numbers are down by 374,000 thanks to this Government. Reform UK would take us back to the day when decent healthcare was only for people who could afford it. Innovation needs to be at the heart of our health service as we strive for better patient care. Does the Prime Minister agree that the partnership between Huddersfield Royal infirmary and the Huddersfield University health innovation centre is a great example of that? How do the Government intend to expand the brilliant health innovation centre model nationally?

• 5 Feb 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I am sure that the Leader of the House agrees that Parliament is sovereign when it comes to the legislative framework of this country. With that in mind, I would appreciate his views on the actions of a small number of unelected Members of the Lords who are blocking the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill rather than seeking to improve it. Can we have a debate in Government time on how the reputation of our parliamentary democracy can be protected in the face of such actions?

• 26 Jan 2026 · Youth Hubs · Hansard source

  More

  I recently met with James Boyle, who runs Longwood FC, a grassroots football club for young people in my constituency. Longwood FC has had a really positive impact on the mental health and physical wellbeing of the young people involved, and is a great example of community-led youth engagement. I commend the Government for their investment in such youth engagement through youth hubs across the country. Can the Minister confirm the timetable for the roll-out of youth hubs in my constituency?

• 22 Jan 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I recently met volunteers from the Yorkshire Air Ambulance charity, which provides a lifesaving emergency service to 5 million people across our region. Last year, it completed an average of five missions a day, which is an outstanding achievement. Will the Leader of the House join me in commending the charity on its valiant work, and can we have a debate in Government time on how we can secure the future of such services?

• 6 Jan 2026 · Less Survivable Cancers · Hansard source

  More

  Forty-seven per cent of cancers diagnosed in the UK are rare and less common cancers, and 55% of deaths are from rare and less common cancers. That means that, every year, around 180,000 people will be diagnosed with a rare and less common cancer, and more than 92,000 people will die from such cancers. Blood cancer is one such cancer, and I recently met the Blood Cancer Alliance to discuss improving access to lifesaving blood cancer treatments across the UK. Over 280,000 people in the UK are living with blood cancer, and every year 40,000 more receive a diagnosis, including 5,000 children. It is the fifth most common cancer, the most prevalent childhood cancer and the third biggest cancer killer in our country. However, despite amazing advances in tech and treatment, our outcomes are falling behind in the nations. The reason is clear: systemic barriers within the NHS and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence appraisal processes are preventing patients from accessing innovative therapies. Between 2019 and 2025, over a third of NICE appraisals for new blood cancer treatments were terminated—more than double the rate for other cancers. Those are not ineffective drugs; many are available overseas, and even privately in the UK. That creates a two-tier system in which those who can pay receive better care than those who cannot. It is unacceptable. I have been told that treatments such as chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy can transform lives, extending survival and improving quality of life. The current system, with rigid cost-effectiveness thresholds and inflexible commercial frameworks, is failing patients. That is why I warmly welcome the UK Government’s cancer plan, which represents a vital opportunity to reset our approach to cancer care and to ensure that innovation is embraced, not obstructed. By prioritising timely access to effective treatments and addressing systemic barriers, the cancer plan can help deliver world-class outcomes for patients. I stand with the Blood Cancer Alliance and Cancer52 in calling for urgent, joined-up action from Government, NICE, the NHS and industry. Together we can ensure that every person with blood cancer has timely access to the best possible care, because survival should never depend on postcode or income.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Parkinson’s Disease · Hansard source

  More

  I could not agree more. I will speak later about the postcode lottery, although it is not just a postcode lottery; it is across the whole nation. The hon. Member is absolutely right: we should be doing everything we can to ensure consistency of support and adequate support across the nation. Innovation also offers hope. Produodopa—I think I probably said that better today than the last time I was here—was approved for NHS use in 2024. Earlier today, I was at an event organised by Parkinson’s UK and I was talking to a specialist—a neurologist—who was talking about the impact of medication and how much difference that will make. It was fascinating, and that five minutes was of huge value in helping me to understand the impact.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Parkinson’s Disease · Hansard source

  More

  Again, I absolutely agree. I know from talking to one of my constituents, Liz Ryan, that that physical support and that ability to do something, get involved in activities and have help are of immense value. We absolutely have to have a holistic view of this issue; it is not a simple case of just medication or taking people into a clinical environment. We have to look at what we can do within communities, as was mentioned earlier, and at how we can support people with their lives and ensure that they live their lives to their full potential. Some of the innovative medicines can certainly be life-changing for those with severe symptoms, but staffing and funding constraints mean that many hospitals cannot offer those solutions. Access to new treatments must not be a postcode lottery. I want to take a moment to share some encouraging news from my constituency. We currently have a neurology registrar based in Leeds who is spending a significant amount of time seeing Parkinson’s patients in Huddersfield. He works alongside a dedicated doctor who also travels from Leeds to support patients at Huddersfield Royal infirmary. Just last month, they met the operations director at Huddersfield Royal infirmary, who shared some good news: in December, the trust will be advertising for a consultant neurologist with a special interest in Parkinson’s. The role will be based in Leeds but will include a significant commitment to patients in Huddersfield. That is a direct result of our local campaign, and in particular the tireless work of our local Parkinson’s community group, led by Liz Ryan MBE and Dr Chris Ryan. It shows what can be achieved when patients, families, clinicians and elected representatives work together.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Parkinson’s Disease · Hansard source

  More

  I agree. I will refer later to ICBs, which clearly have to ensure the full, necessary support, particularly for this community. I understand the pressures they are under—we all do—but taking away support from people is a much bigger issue than people not getting support in the first place. I am sure that all of us across the House would like to work on that issue. This plan is rooted in lived experience and offers a practical road map for change, including renewed investment—I say that to give some context; otherwise we will lose track of where we are. In April, during World Parkinson’s Day, I attended the Big Sing for Parkinson’s. That uplifting event was quite amazing and inspiring; it was full of energy, music and community spirit. It was organised by the same “Movers and Shakers” group I referred to earlier, and brought together people living with Parkinson’s, and very importantly their families, in both London and Huddersfield. I had the pleasure of speaking to Mark Mardell, the former BBC political journalist and the lead petitioner—he is sitting at the back of the Public Gallery, and I thank him very much for the petition and for the work he is doing. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] He shared his personal journey with me and emphasised the urgent need for reform. Like the charter, the Big Sing is a celebration of resilience and a call for action. Since July 2024, the Government have taken the following steps. The autumn Budget last year included a £600 million increase in social care funding and an £86 million boost to the disabled facilities grant. In April 2025, the Government reaffirmed their commitment to improving outcomes for neurological conditions, through initiatives such as the RightCare toolkit, the Getting It Right First Time programme and the neurology transformation programme. Spending review 2025 also pledged £29 billion in additional NHS funding by 2029, including £10 billion for technology and GP training. This is just the start in addressing the needs of those living with Parkinson’s. An estimated 253 people with Parkinson’s live in my constituency of Colne Valley. That is as per the previous constituency boundaries, but there will be revised figures in line with the new constituency boundaries, although they are hopefully not revised upwards. West Yorkshire NHS ICB plans and delivers care for people with Parkinson’s in the ICB area. In 2023-24, the spend on admissions to hospital in that area increased by 4.9%, and the cost of each admission was just over £6,000. However, we face extremely serious challenges. The UK ranks near the bottom in Europe for the number of neurologists per capita. Neurology services meet the 18-week referral target only about half the time. Only 44% of patients in England have access to an occupational therapist, only 62% have access to a physiotherapist and just 40% have access to a speech and language therapist. Those professionals are essential; they are not optional. The Government are addressing that issue through the broader NHS workforce strategy, which includes expanding the number of training places and reforming medical education pathways to address shortages in specialist areas such as neurology. However, the Parky charter also highlights the importance of timely medication. For people with Parkinson’s, receiving medication within 30 minutes of the prescribed time is not a convenience; it is an absolute necessity. Yet more than half of hospitalised patients report delays. The NHS’s medicines safety improvement programme, which runs from 2024 to 2027, is a step forward, but implementation must be consistent across all trusts.