Rachel Gilmour MP: speeches

4 Jul 2025–3 Jul 2026

How these years work

Our reporting years run from 4 July to 3 July, starting with the 2024 general election. They are not official parliamentary sessions. Office costs keep IPSA’s April–March financial years. Records may cover only part of a year; a missing record does not mean no work was done.

Read what this MP said, asked and contributed in Parliament.

18 published records · newest first.

Speeches

  • 18 Jun 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source
    More

    My constituent Marika built Fortitude gym in Williton from scratch at just 27 years old after selling her own house mid-covid. It has grown into a community wellbeing hub with classes and events, offering support to members coming back from injury, illness and addiction, one of whom went from being on crutches to running a half marathon. Outfits like Marika’s are doing preventive health work that takes pressure off the NHS, but business rates and overheads continue to push them towards closure. Will the Leader of the House make the case to his Treasury colleagues for fairer business rate treatment for small, independent health and fitness-focused providers, so they can keep doing the vital preventive work that the NHS relies on?

  • 16 Jun 2026 · Community Hospitals · Hansard source
    More

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) for giving us all the opportunity to shine a spotlight on the challenges facing community hospitals, particularly in rural areas. Neighbourhood health and care in the community are the thrust of this Government’s health strategy. That is admirable and right, but good intentions alone are not a health strategy, and intentions mean very little if the infrastructure to deliver them does not exist. In constituencies like Tiverton and Minehead, it increasingly does not. Let us take, for example, the removal of the CT scanner from Minehead community hospital. I have been stopped in the street more times than I can count by constituents expressing how big a blow that has been. The whole point of a scanner in Minehead was proximity—for it to be accessible to people across west Somerset who face long journeys to reach secondary care. Its removal is therefore curious, and a direct contradiction of the Government’s stated commitment to bring care closer to people. The strategy says one thing and the decisions say another. It is not hard to understand why we are where we are. West Somerset is, in effect, a cul-de-sac, with limited transport, limited infrastructure and a long schlep to Musgrove Park hospital in Taunton for most things approaching secondary services. That has consequences beyond access; we are not an easy posting for healthcare workers either, precisely because of the geographic reality. There are no meaningful incentives attracting people to train and practise there, and there is no laser focus on local recruitment efforts, which I believe is our best bet. We live in a beautiful part of the world—it is true—but why would a newly qualified clinician choose a remote, poorly connected posting when better resourced options exist elsewhere? The south-west, as my colleagues know, is haemorrhaging healthcare capacity, and my constituency feels the effects acutely. Frankly, we are not being resourced as though those difficulties matter at all. Every missed appointment is not just a missed check-up; it is a missed diagnosis. When people cannot reach care, conditions worsen. Some will inevitably end up in A&E, placing further pressure on an already stretched urgent care system, in a region with one of the country’s least accessible healthcare networks. We end up paying more for failure, and the approach has not acknowledged that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. When we talk of community care, it must reflect the needs of the community it serves. Rural areas tend to be older in demographic make-up, and healthcare provision is sparse. That cannot be treated as a marginal factor; it is the central planning reality. The rural premium in healthcare need is real, documented and consistently under-weighted in funding decisions. My party has always been a proud champion of rural areas. We recognise the postcode lottery of care provision and the health inequalities it perpetuates. It is why we have called for the establishment of the strategic small surgeries fund, specifically designed to prop up buckling services in remote parts of the country and ensure that where someone lives does not determine the quality of care they receive.

  • 2 Jun 2026 · Community Pharmacies · Hansard source
    More

    Of course, I fully agree with my hon. Friend’s comments, and I laud her good work in her constituency. I urge the Government to commit to above-inflation funding increases year on year in order to close the £2 billion gap identified by their own independent analysis, deliver proper integration across the NHS and address the workforce crisis before it becomes irreversible. Pharmacies are ready, they are willing and they are already delivering. The question is whether the Government will match that commitment with the funding and the strategy that the sector and our constituents deserve. I look forward to hearing hon. Members’ contributions.

  • 2 Jun 2026 · Community Pharmacies · Hansard source
    More

    I shall come to just that point in a minute. This sounds strange now, but I am going to say it: take obesity, for example. One in three people in the UK are currently classified as obese. Obesity is estimated to cost the NHS over £11.4 billion a year, with wider societal costs to the tune of £74 billion a year. Community pharmacies are ideally placed to provide wraparound support for those prescribed weight-loss medicines as part of an NHS-commissioned service, but they need the resources and the commissioning framework to do so. There is one aspect of this debate that receives insufficient attention, and I want to raise it briefly. The ongoing situation in the middle east has hit the pharmaceutical supply chain as much as any other sector. There were a record 219 price concessions announced for community pharmacies in May alone, with further negotiations still ongoing. The cost of medicines has risen sharply. I understand that some cancer drugs have reportedly seen elevenfold increases. Crucially, medicine shortages and record-high price concessions reflect an instability in the supply chain that is being intensified by geopolitical pressures. I put it to the Government that the growing medicine supply crisis poses serious risks to Britain’s preparedness and resilience.

  • 2 Jun 2026 · Community Pharmacies · Hansard source
    More

    The hon. Member makes a good point, which I shall return to in due course. The community pharmacy network has had to absorb real-terms cuts of 30% in Government funding. For most community pharmacies, NHS funding accounts for 90% to 95% of their annual income. That is simply not a sustainable business model; it is a slow strangulation. The Government’s own independent economic analysis, published as recently as March this year, found the gap to be £2 billion a year. More recently still, the Government have admitted that pharmacies in England were funded £800 million less in real terms in 2025-26 than they were a decade ago. It is important to be clear that those are the Government’s own figures. Against that backdrop, I welcome the funding settlement for 2026-27.

  • 2 Jun 2026 · Community Pharmacies · Hansard source
    More

    As I said at the beginning, the Minister is a very hands-on Minister, and I am sure he finds every visit absolutely fascinating. The community pharmacy budget will increase by 10.3% to £3.636 billion. The introduction of independent prescribing into some pharmacy services later this year is a positive step, as are the measures aimed at stabilising the volatile medicines supply system. In the spirit of constructive opposition, I will certainly give credit where credit is due, but we must be honest: the settlement is still far short of what pharmacies need to keep their doors open. Over 600 branches closed last year alone.

  • 2 Jun 2026 · Community Pharmacies · Hansard source
    More

    I beg to move, That this House has considered the future of community pharmacies. It is always a pleasure to see the Minister in his place. I know how committed he is to his brief, and I am grateful for the conversations we have had on a number of important issues. The timing of this debate could hardly be better, coming as it does in the wake of the Government’s announcement just before the weekend. That announcement provides the perfect context within which to couch my remarks. I would like to believe that I have developed a reputation for constructive criticism, and I hope to offer a fair-minded but frank scrutiny of the Government’s plans for community pharmacies. There are positive moves, which I welcome, but there is also considerably further to go. It is clear that the national picture for community pharmacies is one of an incredibly fragile system, and I am sure that much reference will be made this morning to the damning headline statistic that since 2016, over 1,000 pharmacies have been lost across England. Funding was cut that same year and remained flat in cash terms until 2024, even as the volume of NHS pharmaceutical care and the cost of providing it surged.

  • 2 Jun 2026 · Community Pharmacies · Hansard source
    More

    I agree wholeheartedly. I want to turn to two issues that I consider to be the systemic failures underlying all others: workforce and integration. On workforce, the community pharmacy network lost 3,000 full-time equivalent pharmacists between 2021 and 2025. That is not a sustainable trajectory. There is a specific incoherence in current policy that I must name. If one arm of the national health service is funded to recruit pharmacists away from community pharmacy while community pharmacies are simultaneously expected to take pressure off the same system, that is not joined-up workforce planning; it is quite simply the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. The introduction of independent prescribing is laudable and long overdue, and I note that it is expected to come later this year, but I ask for more specificity from the Minister. What is the Government’s current timetable for making independent prescribing a routine, commissioned part of NHS community pharmacy services? If we train pharmacists to prescribe and then fail to commission services that let them do so in community settings, we will have wasted a major opportunity, and we will have trained a cohort of professionals whose skills are systematically underused. On integration, Pharmacy First will not reach its full potential if GPs, hospitals, NHS 111 and patients all have a different understanding of how it functions. The incongruence within the system is hobbling pharmacy practice. What is required is proper system-wide integration, with pharmacies recognised as a fundamental pillar of our NHS. As the NHS modernisation Bill progresses through Parliament, that must be recognised. Pharmacies are already doing the work that the Government say they want the NHS to do. They are the first port of call, the most accessible point of contact and the trusted face of healthcare on high streets and in rural communities across this country. The Government have taken some positive steps, and I reiterate that the 10.3% uplift is very important. The direction of travel towards community care, independent prescribing and neighbourhood health is right, but direction without sufficient resource is just aspiration.

  • 2 Jun 2026 · Community Pharmacies · Hansard source
    More

    As a rural MP myself, I certainly have a grasp of what my hon. Friend addresses, and I shall come to that in a minute. Analysis conducted by the Independent Pharmacies Association shows that an average pharmacy dispensing around 10,000 items a month will face a shortfall of approximately £56,000, even after the settlement. Without a commitment to continued above-inflation funding increases year on year, patients will face an acceleration of service reductions and closures. Those closures will fall hardest on communities such as mine and that of my hon. Friend, as I will explain. My constituents have lived with these difficulties. At a cursory glance, there are 16 pharmacies across Tiverton and Minehead, serving a population of approximately 91,200. On average, they dispense 113,000 prescriptions every month because they are busy, essential, community institutions. Yet a survey of 3,000 people in Tiverton, conducted by a local GP surgery, found that 30% of respondents were unable to find a pharmacy. That should simply not be the case in 21st-century Britain. It cuts to the heart of a fundamental truth about rural healthcare and much more that successive Governments have neglected to confront.

  • 2 Jun 2026 · Community Pharmacies · Hansard source
    More

    I agree that a strategic approach is always best. The distances, the limited public transport and the dispersed nature of rural populations mean that the closure of a single pharmacy can represent a genuine healthcare crisis for thousands of people. I see that directly in my constituency; the loss of a fully fledged pharmacy with all its associated services in Bishops Lydeard in March 2024 was a blow to the community. In its place there is now a dispensary, but solely for patients of the surgery. The same thing happened in Norton Fitzwarren. Transport woes, which so often hold back my constituents, sever a vital link to the health service. Jhoots, the previous provider of pharmacy services in parts of Tiverton and Minehead, had operated poorly for some time. Constituents lamented the missing medicines, unexpected closures and queues stretching down the street. Under the new stewardship of Allied Pharmacies, things have improved markedly. That is a testament to what good management and proper investment can achieve.

  • 2 Jun 2026 · Community Pharmacies · Hansard source
    More

    I have had that discussion with the Minister, who reassured me that the Jhoots scenario has been at the front of his mind and he will seek to resolve it. There is also the question of business rates. It seems manifestly unfair that community pharmacies, which are frontline NHS providers in every meaningful sense, are required to pay full business rates, while GP surgeries and dental practices do not face the same burden. I ask the Minister how that disparity can be justified and whether the Government intend to address that. Pharmacies are the engine of community care and offer an opportunity that the Government have not fully grasped. The thrust of the Government’s health strategy has been care in the community, devolving healthcare back to local settings, with neighbourhood health structures and a shift away from hospitals to primary and preventive care. All of that is absolutely right but cannot be delivered without the community pharmacy network. Pharmacies are already doing the work the Government say they want the NHS to do: local, preventive, accessible care, delivered by trusted professionals in the heart of communities. The funding must match the words.

  • 2 Jun 2026 · Community Pharmacies · Hansard source
    More

    I assure the hon. Lady that some of the most frustrating conversations I have are with my local ICBs. Properly resourced pharmacies could release a staggering 51 million primary care appointments through an expanded Pharmacy First service, prevention services and a greater role in managing long-term conditions. That is 51 million appointments freed up in general practice, allowing more people to escape the infamous 8 am scramble. Pharmacies often meet people where they are, offering more accessible services to those who might not otherwise engage with the health service at all. They are arguably the most accessible arm of the NHS.

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

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Furniss. I thank the hon. Member for Cannock Chase (Josh Newbury), who I would also be proud to call my hon. Friend, for bringing this debate to Westminster Hall. I do not think there is a single elected person sitting in this Chamber who does not realise what a wonderful privilege it is to represent all our constituents. But a day like today, when we have an opportunity to change the lives of people who suffer from EDS, is a particularly privileged day. I hold that thought at the front of my mind, and thank all Members for coming. A few weeks ago I met one of the most brave, beautiful young women I have met in a long time. Her name is Stevie, and she lives in Willand, which is in the Devon part of my constituency. She came to see me, but she was quite worried about it because she had never been to see an MP before—there was a degree of trepidation. But she was so eloquent, passionate and determined to tell me about the impact that this dreadful disease had had on her life, I had no option but to come here today to repeat her words. Like many of the constituents who have been mentioned, Stevie had to raise her own funds to get diagnosed and have the treatment. She was housebound and bedbound, and had to give up work. She has a wonderfully supportive husband who goes out to work six days a week to support her and their two young children, who happen to be autistic. What a beacon of honour and bravery—I just cannot imagine how she lives on a day-to-day basis. Those with EDS have been left to suffer without the structures needed to make timely, evidence-informed decisions. Patients are not asking for predetermined outcomes or routine surgery; they are asking for recognition that suspected craniocervical instability in Ehlers-Danlos syndrome requires a defined process for assessment and management within the NHS. Of Ehlers-Danlos Support UK members, 92% are not able to work because they are so affected by the condition. Almost half of those people were working, but had to give up entirely because of the syndrome’s debilitating impact. This is not just about people’s lives and their mental health; it is actually about supporting our country and enabling people with this syndrome who do want to work to make a contribution. Rather than leaving patients to deteriorate to the point of having to consider neurosurgical options, there should be an early diagnosis. As many colleagues have said, establishing a specified EDS care pathway makes the case for itself. Earlier intervention would improve quality of life and strengthen the economic health of the country by enabling people with EDS to remain in work—like the member of staff of the hon. Member for Blaydon and Consett (Liz Twist). It is true that the Department of Health and Social Care’s recognition of the complexity of EDS and the low awareness surrounding it is a step in the right direction. But I believe the central ask of this Government and the Minister is to heed the collective call from across the parties for a defined diagnostic and care pathway.

  • 4 Mar 2026 · Healthcare in Rural Areas · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Huq. I thank the hon. Member for Mid Bedfordshire (Blake Stephenson), my colleague on the Public Accounts Committee, for securing this debate. Many hon. Members have today outlined problems in their constituencies that, I am afraid, are all too familiar in mine. I represent a disproportionately elderly population, which brings with it great wisdom as well as greater health challenges, particularly given that parts of my constituency are some of the least densely populated in England. Shabby transport connectivity hobbles every aspect of my constituents’ lives. Perhaps no more acutely is this reality felt than in access—or the lack of access—to healthcare. For people in the West Somerset corner of my constituency, it can take two hours and two buses to reach Musgrove Park hospital in Taunton. I am told that a return fare would cost my constituents an eye-watering £180 in a taxi, which is simply unaffordable to most local people. These barriers delay diagnoses and treatment. I am thankful to the Minister for Care for being a responsive member of his Government, but I cannot hide my disappointment at the decision to snub Minehead’s calls for a permanent CT scanner installation. The decision was supposedly reached because such a move was deemed uneconomical. It proved to be a game changer for so many local people, but it is indeed uneconomical because terrible transport links suppress demand. To conclude, remoteness has not been given the weighting it should in the Government’s local government funding settlement. I implore the Government—and I hope the Minister takes this away—to undertake a real, forensic look at just how important rurality and remoteness is as a factor for the cost of healthcare delivery in rural areas.

  • 10 Feb 2026 · Independent Water Commission: Final Report · Hansard source
    More

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) for securing the debate. I also thank my many constituents who, quite rightly, have grave concerns about this matter and have written to me about it. My party has made its dissatisfaction with the White Paper clear, and my colleagues are making the case strongly again today. We have been leading the charge in calling for a comprehensive approach to tackling what is nothing short of a crisis in the water sector. The Government made tackling this crisis an important pillar of their election campaign, so it is deeply disappointing that the reforms set out in the water White Paper fall far short of what the situation demands. The system is in dire straits and requires a complete overhaul, but instead the Government offer only the lightest of plans that fail to beef up regulations in a meaningful manner or provide funding provision for enforcement. Although the abolition of Ofwat is welcome, the uncertainty around its replacement is unhelpful. Farmers need proper support to tackle agricultural run-off, which accounts for around 40% of water pollution. As stewards of the land, they are inevitably stewards of our water as well. How can it be that we have allowed corporate greed to run rampant, and allowed these companies to have presided over the routine pumping of filth into the waterways of this land? It is quite remarkable. All the while, the good people of the west country have seen their bills soar, some by as much as threefold. The Government offer only the lightest of plans: weak regulation, no meaningful enforcement and no funding to ensure compliance. As my constituency straddles the Somerset-Devon border, we are in the unenviable position of having two water companies: Wessex Water and South West Water. I think it is fair to say that I have made my views on South West Water clear before, and I will once again direct my ire at South West Water, because its behaviour, inertia and refusal to acknowledge the gravity of situations of its own making has been pitiful. Just a week ago, I raised the matter of my poor constituents at Bawdens bakery in Bampton, who have been forced to close and sell up because their property has flooded so many times. I had a most unhelpful meeting with the director of South West Water, who showed only his complete complacence and, I have to say, arrogance, to such an extent that I had to ask him and his staff to leave. The public health implications are grave. I have heard horror stories from constituents whose children have fallen seriously ill after swimming in local rivers. The beaches at Dunster and Blue Anchor now carry the dreaded brown flag status. It is a shameful state of affairs. Is it really too much for the British public to expect clean water as a basic right? At the risk of being blunt and somewhat crude, suffice it to say that the Tiverton sewage works absolutely reek every time it rains—and anyone familiar with the west country will know how often that is. It is inexcusable and utterly foul. It is a stench and a situation more in character with the 12th century, certainly not the 21st. I could be more colourful with my description, but I will spare colleagues and preserve my own sanity.

  • 28 Jan 2026 · Firearms Licence Holders: Mandatory Medical Markers · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms McVey. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) for securing this debate. We have all watched with great sadness the recent shootings in the United States—scenes that should have shaken any civilised society. Thankfully, Britain is not a trigger-happy country, nor do we aspire to be. Let me be absolutely clear: this is not about restricting lawful firearm ownership. As a liberal, I am not in the business of banning things for the sake of it. As a rural MP, and having spent almost all my life in the west country, I am a creature of the countryside. I know that guns are part of rural life, but they are tools, not toys. Balancing responsible gun ownership with public safety is a delicate dance. Gun owners already undergo rigorous checks and we should avoid excessive bureaucracy, but the system is inconsistent and leaves gaps. Mandatory medical markers would close those gaps. Shooting organisations themselves recognise that: the British Association for Shooting and Conservation, among others, supports the use of medical markers because it reinforces what they know from experience, which is that licensed gun owners are overwhelmingly responsible and pose no risk to the public. That is precisely why their call for compulsory markers reflects a desire for a system that is robust, consistent and trusted by all. We must also consider the wider context. Mental health is a growing concern in rural communities such as mine. Farmers are among the most resilient people in the country, but resilience does not make anyone immune to pressure. Rural life can be hard and isolating; it involves long hours and financial uncertainty. That is not to pathologise farmers—quite the opposite—but acknowledging the pressures they face is important. The introduction of mandatory medical markers would be quite simply a win-win for gun owners, the public and the medical professionals who play such a vital role in the licensing process. It would strengthen trust, enhance safety and reinforce the responsible culture that already exists in our shooting communities.

  • 4 Nov 2025 · Cross-border Healthcare · Hansard source
    More

    My hon. Friend is making a point about the border between England and Wales, but I represent a constituent who lives in a spot equidistant between two hospitals in Exeter and Taunton. Only one hospital could provide the treatment she needed, but the consultant there recommended rehabilitation at a third hospital across the border in Tiverton. After a lengthy back and forth, she was allowed treatment on the grounds of extenuating circumstances. Will my hon. Friend join me in pressing for a clear, binding system to allow seamless cross-border referrals where clinically appropriate?

  • 16 Oct 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source
    More

    In my constituency, there is a fantastic organisation called the Filo Project, a community interest company that provides innovative and award-winning dementia care. When people come to the Filo Project, however, their care is subject to VAT of 20% simply because it is not commissioned by a local authority, which can claim back VAT. Will the Leader of the House find time in Government business for a debate on the VAT status of community interest companies that are providing this level of dementia or other disability-related daycare, so we do not stay with a system where there is VAT on life-altering social care?

Explore activity by topic or department

Contributions by debate topic

4 Jul 2025–3 Jul 2026. Existing keyword taxonomy applied to official debate titles and contributions; a contribution may appear in more than one topic and unclassified records are retained.

View as listCommunities and local government: 28Communities and local government28Culture, media and sport: 8Culture, media and sport8Defence and foreign affairs: 14Defence and foreign affairs14Democracy and constitution: 17Democracy and constitution17Economy and business: 42Economy and business42Education and skills: 13Education and skills13Environment and energy: 17Environment and energy17Health and care: 18Health and care18Housing and planning: 4Housing and planning4Immigration and borders: 2Immigration and borders2Justice and policing: 14Justice and policing14Social security and pensions: 5Social security and pensions5Transport: 8Transport8Unclassified: 17Unclassified17
What this shows and doesn't show
4 Jul 2025–3 Jul 2026. Existing keyword taxonomy applied to official debate titles and contributions; a contribution may appear in more than one topic and unclassified records are retained. Published records do not measure effort or effectiveness. Methodology.
Department or topicPublished records
Communities and local government28
Culture, media and sport8
Defence and foreign affairs14
Democracy and constitution17
Economy and business42
Education and skills13
Environment and energy17
Health and care18
Housing and planning4
Immigration and borders2
Justice and policing14
Social security and pensions5
Transport8
Unclassified17

Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →