Rachel Gilmour MP: speeches

Speeches

• 26 Jun 2025 · Armed Forces Day · Hansard source

  More

  Rather fittingly, this debate comes in the shadow of the NATO summit at The Hague yesterday, with its headline pledge for defence spending to reach 5% of GDP by the midpoint of the next decade. I echo remarks from across the House about how we live in an increasingly volatile world —perhaps more volatile and more unpredictable than at any other point in the post-1945 era of pax Europaea and pax Americana. We see the bloodiest conflict on European soil since the second world war and death and devastation in the middle east and across Africa, Asia and beyond. In comfort on civvy street, we are perhaps sometimes guilty of forgetting how fragile our freedoms and democracy are, and we forget the threats posed to them. Our values are not guaranteed; they have to be fought for, and we must be reminded of that. We live in an age that is the historical exception, not the norm. Our way of life at home depends on our strength to defend it and how we project ourselves abroad. We recently celebrated the 80th anniversary of victory in Europe. Just a few generations back, still within the memories of many, this country was engaged in a fight for its very life and survival. We would do well to remember that always. Thankfully, the brave men and women who serve today need no such reminder. I come from a military family. My late father served in the Royal Naval Reserve. Two of my three brothers have had long careers in His Majesty’s armed forces. Ben is a brigadier in what I still insist on calling the Black Watch. As officer command in Scotland when the late Queen died, he was in charge of making sure that everything went smoothly; I cannot tell you how proud I was of my baby brother Ben when it did. Johnny, now retired, was a lieutenant colonel in the Grenadier Guards. They have dedicated their lives to the service of our country. I assure everybody that their example, and that of every soldier, sailor and airperson, reinforces my knowledge that our military remains in the best of hands. I say, perhaps with a shred of bias, that Britain’s armed forces are still the finest in the world. I speak with additional pride about my constituency of Tiverton and Minehead, which is home to 4,577 veterans. It is a proud part of the country with a strong military tradition. I take this opportunity to salute the fantastic presence of the Royal British Legion and other veteran organisations in my patch, particularly the wonderful Dunkirk Memorial House at the foot of the Quantock hills and the armed forces breakfast clubs in Minehead and Bishops Lydeard, which provide a sense of community. Having done lots of pro bono work with the Royal British Legion in a previous life, particularly on PTSD and hearing loss, this is a topic very close to my heart. I am delighted to hear the Minister announce that the armed forces covenant will be included in legislation. It is a national obligation to look after those who have served us. Before I was elected, I had to try and help young RAF veteran Owein and his family, including his young daughter, Autumn, who had just been diagnosed with autism. They had become homeless. If only that legislation had been in place then. I know that my colleague, Councillor Claudette Harrower, who is responsible for the covenant at Mid Devon district council, will endeavour to make sure that the very best has been done. The armed forces covenant is not charity; it is justice. We must be alive to the recruitment crisis currently bedevilling our armed forces. We must close that gap. I fear, however, that we are not overly helping ourselves in this regard. Allow me to draw attention to the plight of a young constituent of mine, which I suspect is a frustratingly similar story to that of a number of young people up and down the country. In February 2024, she gave up the chance to study A-levels to attend the Lichfield assessment centre, where, in October 2024, she passed the assessment with scores that were exemplary and such that she was accepted into the Intelligence Corps. However, by June of this year—some 16 months later—she still has not been given a start date, and just receives occasional holding communications from military authorities. Meanwhile, she gets by with a series of menial part-time jobs, but has seemingly been left in the lurch by her Army recruiters. I am not using her name because she has asked me not to, but I will give the Minister her details later in the hope that we can process this matter sooner rather than later. Young people like my constituent, who are prepared to serve their country and so represent the best of their generation, deserve better. Will the Minister comment on that privately? Will the Minister also commit to publishing detailed targets for processing applications, allocating sufficient personnel to the recruitment pipeline and providing all successful candidates with a concrete start date within a reasonable time period? I want to put on the record that the Veterans Minister was known as a legend when he served in the Royal Marines and, to me, he remains a legend. I can send him an email and receive his response within 48 hours, which is enormously helpful to my constituents, who are the people I serve. In finishing, I refer to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who said that he was a patriot, but not a nationalist. As I finish my speech, I reiterate his words: I speak as a proud patriot, but never, ever a nationalist.

• 3 Jun 2025 · Dementia Care · Hansard source

  More

  Dementia is a uniquely tragic disease because it is, after all, an attack on the mind and on one’s memories. It is a terminal malady for which there is currently no cure and which affects almost every family in the country. My constituent, Timothy, said this of his family’s experience with the disease: “My wife, to whom I was married for 65 years, slipped into dementia about three years ago. When dementia strikes, it comes slowly. We did not know what was happening, and though our children were very supportive, they could not know why one parent had dementia and the other didn’t. Household management got worse, making each day a strain. My wife had been a superb cook, but I was a poor substitute. Our children tried to help, but they had their own lives to live.” In my constituency of Tiverton and Minehead, it is estimated we have 1,877 people living with dementia—a figure that far exceeds the national average—and yet in my constituency and in rural areas around the country, the paucity of care provision coupled with significant transport challenges means that the impact of dementia is felt even more acutely. The lack of access to dementia care only exacerbates feelings of abandonment and isolation. It is no secret that we are an ageing society. Projections from the national health service indicate that we are on course to have over 1 million people living with dementia by 2030, and as many as 1.6 million by the mid-point of this century. This significant demographic shift underscores the need to expand and strengthen the workforce in the care sector through upskilling, training and retention strategies. I speak with particular thrust as the Member of Parliament for an overwhelmingly rural area. I am all too aware of the recruitment and retention woes in remote communities where geographical isolation and resource constraints make things additionally challenging. Several Members of my party have made the point about social care and I know that my party leader makes it on a weekly basis at Prime Minister’s questions, so I will not revisit the need for social care as it runs alongside the NHS. However, we must support our carers. Increased pay for carers is not merely a matter of fairness; it is an investment in a future where better care will inevitably lead to better outcomes for those with dementia. After all, a rising tide lifts all boats. According to the UK Dementia Research Institute, 85% of people with dementia wish to remain in their own home, so it is about time that unpaid carers—those silent heroes—were afforded the right to carer’s leave and a statutory guarantee of regular respite breaks. Unlike other speakers, I have not talked about my family’s experience with dementia until the end of my speech because, quite frankly, I thought I would cry. My three brothers and I were lucky enough to be brought up by an intellectual colossus: my mother, M—Cambridge educated, a City solicitor, and a wonderful mother and grandmother. Fortunately, my family is able financially to look after her, and I am endlessly grateful to my brother and sister-in-law for looking after her as well as they do, and to her carer, Nicolette, who comes from Romania and who has literally changed her life. Somebody earlier said that it is important not to look at the sad side of things, but to look at the best side. I rang my mother—mummy—last Sunday. We were laughing so much that I nearly had to put the phone down. She might not be able to remember everything, but she still has a sense of humour, she still has a good appetite, and she always enjoys a wee glass of sherry. She will be here with me next Wednesday for parliamentary questions. Mummy, I can’t wait to see you. I love you.

• 15 May 2025 · Youth Services · Hansard source

  More

  As a mother of four born Devonians, I know that my constituency is a wonderful place to grow up. It embodies the best of England’s green and pleasant land. It is also home to a vibrant network of youth circles. I pay tribute to the fantastic sports clubs, big and small, across the patch, the strong presence of the young farmers clubs, and to the cadet branches of our armed services in Minehead, Uffculme, Doniford—though they meet in Watchet—and Tiverton. I also pay tribute to the myriad scout and guide troops across my constituency, and the King’s award-winning Exmoor Young Voices, whom I very much look forward to welcoming to Parliament next week. I apologise if I have left anybody out. In an age when screens are increasingly a fixture in daily life for the young generation, the chance to spend time in the countryside is becoming all the more important. It boosts mental health, encourages exploration and lays the foundation for a lifelong appreciation of our natural environment. I sometimes wonder whether the greatest youth service in my constituency is the natural environment. I am keen to ensure that young people appreciate nature’s grounding force. However, opportunities sometimes lie elsewhere for isolated and distant communities. That is a direct result of the underfunding of youth services—a short-changing of future generations. I was shocked, but not entirely surprised, when I saw the figures for 2023-24, which indicated that Somerset funded a youth service for 11 to 19-year-olds to the tune of only £4.21 per young person. Compare that to Hull, which provided £287 per 11 to 19-year-old. If only the Conservatives had not run Somerset into the ground, and underfunded local government across the country. Finally, as we consider the future of youth services, we cannot ignore the benefits of adopting an EU youth mobility scheme. This initiative would allow young people in the UK greater access to work placements, study exchanges and cultural experiences in Europe. It would broaden horizons and foster international co-operation. Giving our youth the ability to explore, grow and develop skills beyond our borders is not just beneficial to them; it strengthens our economy and enriches our society. Surely that scheme would represent one of the greatest services to the young people of Tiverton and Minehead. Either we get serious about the issues facing our youth services, or we fail to tackle them head-on and risk losing what we have, which would be detrimental to all.

• 13 May 2025 · UK-EU Summit · Hansard source

  More

  I simply do not accept what the hon. Member says. Big corporations may be able to adapt, shift operations— [ Interruption. ] Do be quiet for a minute! Big corporations may be able to adapt, shift operations and sidestep the chaos, but for our small businesses—the backbone of our economy—this is not merely an inconvenience, but a catastrophe. Ask my constituent Becca James of Williton what she has made of the Brexit fallout, having run a superb au pair agency that folded. As an MP representing many SMEs in my constituency of Tiverton and Minehead—Minehead being on the sea, hence the fishermen—I hear daily about their struggles to keep trading and to navigate new regulations. Conservative Governments have hung them out to dry, leaving them to fend for themselves in a post-Brexit economic landscape riddled with uncertainties. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. We must swerve the temptations of dogma and pursue policies that benefit our economy, our people and our future. We must come to terms with the fact that forming a new customs arrangement would offset much of this harsh impact and would be a sign of a more grown-up politics. I and my party are looking forward eagerly to the Government’s big reset in the weeks to come. Without a comprehensive trading arrangement with the EU, it will be clear that reset just means rebrand. Fisheries have not fared any better. Grandstanding notions of reclaiming British waters turned out to be hollow, as coastal communities have seen dwindling profits, complicated licensing, and deals that have left them materially worse off than before. If only the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) had attended more than one of the 42 meetings of the EU Parliament Committee on Fisheries, which he was paid to attend, our fishermen might be on a more even keel. We must embrace the EU youth mobility scheme. The West Somerset area of my constituency sits at 324th out of 324 on the social mobility index, and while there is no overnight panacea to this, I believe that those from disadvantaged backgrounds having access to opportunity on the continent can only be a good thing. The youth mobility scheme would democratise travel and work abroad by removing the financial barriers that typically make it an option only for the privileged. It would empower talented young people who may have the skills but lack the financial means to access the same opportunities as their more affluent peers. Why should they be reserved for a few? It is my firm belief that travel and broadening one’s experiences can be one of the best forms of education. Why would we deny our young people that golden ticket to live, work, study and build lifelong friendships in Europe? This is not entirely an argument about economics, for what monetary value can be placed on broadening the horizons of our young people wherever those opportunities may lie? It is a peculiar irony that young people from nations on the other side of the world—the likes of our Australian and Kiwi friends—are part of this scheme, while the UK across that small body of water known as the channel, or la manche, remains on the outside looking in. I will end with the words of the European Union preamble: nous sommes unis dans notre diversité, notre histoire commune, nos valeurs et notre avenir partagés. I will give hon. Members a translation if they need one.

• 25 Mar 2025 · Veterinary Products in Waterways · Hansard source

  More

  I am delighted to secure my first Adjournment debate, and for it to be about veterinary products in waterways, specifically neonicotinoids such as fipronil and imidacloprid. From now on, for your sake and mine, Madam Deputy Speaker, I shall be referring to these neonicotinoids as neonics. I have been extremely keen to secure a debate on this matter for some time now, having had it raised with me before the general election by a constituent, Ueli Zellweger, who is a vet. It is high time that we gave this topic the scrutiny that it so desperately needs. We are a nation of pet lovers. It is estimated that there are around 25 million cats and dogs in the UK. I speak as a doting dog and cat owner myself and I know that our furry friends are an integral part of millions of British families. And so when fleas and ticks come biting, bringing discomfort and annoyance to our beloved pets, we of course want to act swiftly and efficiently to alleviate their suffering. Flea treatment products containing fipronil and imidacloprid are seen as a highly convenient and effective way of dealing with the problems caused by fleas and ticks. In the UK, Imperial College London claims that fipronil is an ingredient in 396 different pet anti-flea and tick treatments, with imidacloprid authorised in some 138 veterinary products. However, this convenience comes at a cost to our waterways and associated ecosystems. Popular though these products are, safe they are not. These two ingredients are extremely toxic. They are very powerful killers indeed and the picture is not pretty. In fact, so powerful are these chemicals that just one drop of fipronil has the potency to wipe out 30,000 bees as well as causing serious neurological damage and hampering the mobility of thousands upon thousands more. As well as this, according to extensive research conducted by Imperial College London, one monthly flea treatment for a large dog contains enough imidacloprid to kill a staggering 25 million bees. The decline in pollinator populations, which in part can be attributed to the use of imidacloprid, threatens agricultural productivity and has very serious long-term implications for our national food security. This is not simply a mere triviality to be neglected. Authorities have recognised the toxicity levels and the hideous harm that these chemicals can cause on the natural world. Since 2017, fipronil has been banned in agricultural use, and imidacloprid has been banned since 2018. But given the unregulated nature of these chemicals in relation to flea products, we are allowing these products into our environment through the back door, and our aquatic and nearby ecosystems are paying the price. There is not just one route for these neonics to enter our British waterways. It is important to be aware of all the various pathways towards this pollution. The most obvious, and most direct, is simply the contact of pets with water bodies themselves. If a dog goes swimming in a river after receiving their course of treatment, the product is then introduced into the waterways, allowing it to enter our rivers, lakes and streams and go wherever the water takes it, wreaking havoc as it travels. Dissemination can also occur because of rainwater run-off, with residual product washing off from treated animals into drainage systems and ending up in our waterways. Equally, the washing of pet bedding and even pet owners’ hands are thought to be common ways in which these dangerous products enter our waterways. There are some less direct pathways that still pose a problem—and at this point I must apologise to those currently eating their supper. These products are generally harmless to our dogs and cats, but they can be absorbed by our four-legged friends. Once absorbed, the products can be excreted, and even when responsible owners clean up after their pets—something that is not universal, unfortunately—the traces of fipronil and imidacloprid left behind can still prove incredibly damaging once washed into our waterways. Studies have revealed that imidacloprid is one of the most frequently detected pesticides in dogs’ urine, but the level is still comparatively low, with the National Office of Animal Health finding that only around 11% of topically applied fipronil is systematically absorbed. The shedding of treated hair or skin can also lead to a pathway being created. Once these products are in our waterways, not only are they utterly deadly for the thousands of native aquatic organisms in the UK, but they are highly toxic to sea and freshwater fish. Even at low concentrations, fipronil can be disruptive to aquatic life cycles. River sample data gathered by the UK Environment Agency over the course of a two-year period between 2016 and 2018 from 20 different waterways in England discovered fipronil residue in 98% of freshwater samples and traces of imidacloprid in 66% of all samples. Beyond the effect on our waterways, other studies have found fipronil to be incredibly toxic to birds. It brings me no joy to report that this is not just an aquatic problem. Indeed, through a process of collecting 103 different bird nests, researchers found that every single one without exception contained fipronil, and an overwhelming majority had significant remnants of imidacloprid. The truth is that the decline in aquatic insects that emanates from the flowing of these products in our waterways affects fish populations, who rely on these insects as a primary food source. This in turn impacts bird species that prey on fish, producing a dangerous snowball effect that reverberates throughout the ecosystem. This deterioration of biodiversity greatly diminishes the overall resilience of our ecosystems, exposing a vulnerability to factors of climate change and invasive species. One of the most troubling aspects of the likes of fipronil and imidacloprid is their persistence in the environment. The chemicals disintegrate slowly and can remain in soils and waterways for extensive periods of time. In the case of imidacloprid, scientists say that the residual effect lasts in soil for months, sometimes even years, and the breakdown product of these chemicals is understood to be even more toxic than the parent compound.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Rural Communities: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you for calling me to speak, Dr Murrison, and it was lovely to see you last night. [ Laughter. ] No, no, but it is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. Obviously, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) for securing this vital debate. It is always excellent to see so many of my Liberal Democrat colleagues here in Westminster Hall to support our rural communities. As the Member of Parliament for the overwhelmingly rural constituency of Tiverton and Minehead, I am incredibly proud to represent such a beautiful part of the world. However, for all our natural beauty, we are not without our problems. On Monday, I met Sir Chris Whitty to discuss how my constituency is at the sharp end of what can only be described as a dentistry crisis, with dental practices closing in droves. My constituency sits within a dental desert. In 2024, according to the House of Commons Library, the proportion of adults in Tiverton and Minehead who had been seen by a dentist in the previous two years was well below the average in England. In Somerset, the figure was just 32%; in Devon, it was 34.7%; and the average for England was 40.3%. The data for children in my constituency is even more troubling. In Somerset, only 42.3% of children had been seen by a dentist in the previous two years; in Devon, it was 46.6%; and the average across England was 54.4%. The disparity between those figures is appalling. As many colleagues have mentioned, young people in rural areas such as Tiverton and Minehead are getting a woeful deal. The gaps in sixth-form provision, save for the few places at West Somerset college and Petroc college, are detrimental to the aspirations of students who wish to pursue further education. Without wishing to sound as if I am asking for the world, there is a lot to be done to improve the lives of people in Tiverton and Minehead. I will not relent in highlighting these issues, because I want to ensure that my constituency, and of course rural communities up and down our country, are not overlooked.

• 11 Mar 2025 · English Rugby Union: Governance · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to speak in this debate. I thank the hon. Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon) for raising the issue of the state of governance of rugby union in England. I have some wonderful rugby clubs in the constituency I am proud to represent—Tiverton and Minehead—including Tiverton, Minehead Barbarians and Wiveliscombe, who punch well above their weight. Rugby has been a large fixture throughout my life. My father donned the famous red rose at international level, and also captained both Harlequins and Northampton. It would be a struggle to find a stronger supporter and lover of rugby than me. But it is safe to say that English rugby union has changed a great deal since my father’s playing days. The governance of rugby union in this country is on shaky ground, and although recent success in the Six Nations has provided some immediate buoyancy among the England rugby faithful, it is clear that there are serious structural issues at play, many of which the hon. Member for Camborne and Redruth mentioned. At the grassroots level, rugby is really suffering. The community game is collapsing under the weight of insufficient finances. The RFU is not sufficiently supporting the wider rugby ecosystem in this country. Most notably we have seen—and it has been well documented by hon. Members this morning, and will continue to be—English clubs, great and historic rugby institutions, go under in recent years, such as Wasps and London Irish. All that is while C-suite salaries and bonuses have continued to be very handsome indeed. That is financially unsustainable, and a travesty. We must take note from our competitors because—aside from the fact that I am a bit of a Francophile, and as a Liberal, have a natural orientation towards Europe—the French model is quite clearly geared towards cutting-edge club rugby. In England the national team’s success dominates the story. However, in recent years it has become apparent that the lofty standards of the French national team are a natural by-product of a strong top 14 league. Put simply, they have the best of both worlds, because their strong international outfit is downstream from their thriving club rugby scene. Here in England, we seem to be struggling with both—we are seemingly stuck between a rock and a hard place. The club rugby model in France has guaranteed a much more stable financial climate, attracting the biggest stars, driving competition, and developing a certain watchability and commercial security that we do not quite have on this side of the channel. It tells us something when some of our brightest prospects—guaranteed mainstays for years to come—have retired from international duty to play in France. I think it is reasonable to suggest that, had circumstances beyond their control been different, most—if not all—would still be representing England. Change must come. For the good of the game, the governing body must adapt. Right now it is proving to be outmoded; it must move with the times. I associate myself with calls for an independent review into RFU governance, suggesting a need for structural reforms to improve financial oversight and club engagement. If that happens, no one will cheer louder at Twickenham than me.

• 30 Jan 2025 · Proportional Representation: General Elections · Hansard source

  More

  How we vote and how we select who governs this country is, by nature, a topic of huge national significance, and one that is too often pushed to the sidelines. I have been a member of the Liberal party, now the Liberal Democrats, since I was 17. Fighting for a fairer system of electoral representation is key to my political mooring and my party’s fight for a fairer democracy for the British people. I am the mother of four children. I have one daughter. She is as clever as she is beautiful. Last year, she produced a report on voting systems across the world, including in Russia, South America, Africa, America, the European Union and here. Her analysis showed incontrovertibly that proportional systems are much fairer, including for women, those who are disabled and those from an ethnic minority. This is not just about the bar charts or the figures; it is about real fairness. In the most recent election, we saw a Government elected to power on the lowest vote share for over 20 years, with the lowest proportion of the electorate’s support since 1918. Just 20% of registered voters cast their ballot for the Labour party. Four out of five voters either voted for somebody else or did not vote at all. One of the so-called merits of the first-past-the-post system is that it is designed to deliver a clean winner, but this is illusory. Reaching back through the annals of British electoral history, we see that 1931 was the last time a governing party secured over 50% of the vote share. The towering majorities secured under our system were delivered not on the basis of a representative vote, but through the quirks and idiocies of a flawed system. When first past the post does not deliver a towering majority, it delivers exactly the sort of instability that it is designed to avoid. Did the 2017 election produce a clear winner, leading to a strong and stable Government? The former Member for Maidenhead could answer that one for us. For too long, the parties of red and blue have taken the British people for granted. In last summer’s general election, Labour and the Conservatives returned their lowest combined vote share in the age of universal suffrage, yet their combined seats still dwarf those of all other parties in this place. Some 57.8% of voters had to settle for an MP they did not vote for, including my constituents. That hardly seems right or fair. The evidence of a broken system is clear for all to see. What on earth has happened to true majority rule? Another argument in support of the first-past-the-post system relates to its simplicity. I agree that our democratic process should be simple, but what is simpler than people being able to vote for the party that they believe in, rather than feeling that they have to vote tactically? The system is not fair, and it is not proportional. I and my colleagues in my party will continue to fight hard to raise awareness about its unfairness, not because it is the politically expedient thing to do—as has been pointed out, we did rather well under first past the post at the last general election—but because it is the right thing to do. If anyone’s argument against a fairer electoral system is that they might disagree with whom the British people vote for, I would ask them to consider why they make such an argument—because it is not out of service to the British people.

• 30 Jan 2025 · Proportional Representation: General Elections · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the shadow Minister for giving way. It does at least show that he has some sense and knowledge of what democracy means.

• 6 Jan 2025 · General Election · Hansard source

  More

  Does the right hon. Member agree that the essence of the petition is in fact the political manifestation of buyer’s remorse, and that the delivery and introduction of proportional representation would not lead to such remorse so soon?

• 21 Nov 2024 · Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the hon. Member for South Dorset (Lloyd Hatton) on securing the debate. I have listened with interest to all hon. Members, and it is a welcome exception that we are speaking in the House with unity and with one voice, from a shared sense of the value of free speech, to stop the bullies who use SLAPPs to intimidate people so horrifically. I too have a story. It is about a lady called Carrie Jones, who received a legal letter from a “wealth creator”, Samuel Leeds, after she raised concerns about Leeds’s interactions with her brother, who had died of suicide after spending thousands on Mr Leeds’s controversial courses. Carrie lost her brother Danny, who was an Army reservist, to suicide in 2019. Before his death, he had attended a course run by Samuel Leeds, who still offers controversial courses on achieving financial freedom through property investment. Danny, who was vulnerable and in debt even before joining Mr Leeds’s course, attempted to secure a refund from Mr Leeds before he took his life. Carrie attempted to contact Mr Leeds after her brother’s death to understand the effect that the course had had on him, but she never received a satisfactory response, so she spoke to some journalists and others who had handled Leeds’s courses—which sister would not? She wanted answers for her family, but she also felt that there was a serious public interest concern about Mr Leeds’s business, not least because his courses did not appear to be regulated by any professional or governmental body. A trading standards authority had ignored her attempts to raise concerns about wealth creators such as Mr Leeds. Shortly after Carrie spoke to her Member of Parliament about Mr Leeds’s courses, she received a legal letter from Ellisons, a firm of solicitors representing Leeds in numerous legal disputes with his critics. That legal letter suggested that she had been participating in a campaign of harassment against Mr Leeds. It did not immediately threaten her with a lawsuit, but it warned that legal action could follow if she suggested that Mr Leeds and his course had had any influence on her brother’s suicide. Carrie responded firmly that she would not retract her criticism and would continue to raise awareness until her questions were answered. What a very brave woman! A YouTube channel on which she had featured asking questions about Mr Leeds’s involvement with her brother was subject to legal threats and closed down. It will not surprise the House to hear that this is not the only instance of Mr Samuel Leeds sending threats. The Guardian has found some 15 individuals subject to legal threats from Mr Leeds, while The Economist has reported on the despair of attendees, who felt the course was a scam. Another man, who asked to remain anonymous, attended a course run by Samuel Leeds and was dissatisfied. He later posted on the Facebook page of Mr Nick Fletcher —a former Member of Parliament—asking whether there were any safeguarding measures to protect vulnerable people from wealth creation schemes, which was not an unreasonable request. He wrote that he lives with disabilities and had seen people trying to manipulate the vulnerable into paying for these courses. That is all he said; he did not mention Samual Leeds. Despite not naming Mr Leeds, the man received a letter from Ellisons Solicitors, on Mr Leeds’s behalf, citing the Facebook comment and warning: “Any mention of our clients may be perceived as harassment and/or defamation.” A spokesperson for Mr Leeds has commented: “Danny Butcher's death in 2019 was a tragedy. Your account of the relevant events is one-sided and misses important context, which we have no confidence you will fairly represent”— to fellow MPs. He continued: “Our business and founder were subjected to a campaign of abuse and sustained attacks, including unwarranted defamatory and even obscene and deeply personal publications.” What a sensitive soul. Along with Members of all parties, I, as a Liberal Democrat, resoundingly request that the Government build SLAPPs into any legislation that is coming forward, because it is desperately needed for this country, our citizens and our legal system.