Rachel Hopkins MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 30 Jan 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Dr Mulholland, I want to push a little on where you were saying the royal college sits on the ability of members to say that they would not want to participate in assisted dying, if it came through, and on your written evidence saying that you would like to see a separate body. Given that many GPs are already very much involved in the care of their patients and will often be doing a lot of palliative care themselves, particularly around medications, and given that the Bill is about terminally ill adults with a diagnosis of six months left to live, do you mean that all GPs would stop at that six months and it would go over to an independent body, or are you saying that those GPs who want to continue that care could do so but that those who do not want to be involved in a potential route to assisted dying would step out? I would like a little clarity on that, given the person-centred care that so many GPs do so well. Dr Mulholland: The shape of the service is not set out in the Bill. We would say that GPs need to have a space where they can step away from it: that is the key point that we want to get across. For those who want to take part, it may be that they decide to do it, but it would have to sit outside the core general medical services that we provide at the moment. This is an additional thing; this is not part of our core job. We think that a separate service—it may not just be GPs; there may be lots of different practitioners and health professionals involved —would sit better with that. You could then assess the capacity and assess those other parts that are so important and are in the Bill at the later stages. The GP may have a role, but that would be very much up to the individual GP to decide. It would not be set out that they should be taking part. They would then probably be part of this additional service to which the others who are not taking part could signpost. We just want to make sure that there is that clear space.

• 30 Jan 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q My question, directed at Chloe, is about the practical application of access to doctors for patients, as suggested in the proposed legislation, and how doctors have those conversations with patients—particularly, when it comes to geriatricians, older patients. We heard from somebody yesterday who said that there were concerns around how older people were treated, and the potential risk of elder abuse. I would be interested in the practical application of those conversations, in your experience. Dr Furst: First up, a patient has to specifically ask me about voluntary assisted dying. They have got to use words that really imply that that is what they want. I will often ask any relatives to leave so that I can have a conversation just with them, to try and reduce the risk of coercion, and then invite the family back. One of the practical things that I often ask the patient is when they started thinking about this. Is it something that they have always considered should be a right, or is it more of a new-found belief given their current suffering? I want to understand what their current suffering is. I ask specifically whether they feel a burden on their family and friends. It is an hour-plus long conversation to really understand them and their suffering. Again, I make sure they understand all the other treatment options available to them and what good palliative care looks like. I will often be prescribing other medications as part of that good palliative care—opiates and anxiolytics. As a geriatrician, I am also making sure that their mood is also addressed, and that this is not a reactive depression. I am really doing a holistic and comprehensive geriatric assessment as part of that voluntary assisted dying assessment as well.

• 29 Jan 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q We have spoken a lot about the range of doctors and nurses who will be involved in a multidisciplinary team. Have you thought about the protections in the Bill for those who do not wish to participate? Is there the right balance for them not to participate but to still work with a patient who might want to take this choice? What are your views on that? Professor Esmail: These safeguards already exist. For example, if someone says, “I want you to remove my ventilatory tube, because I want to die”, as a doctor you can say, “I’m not able to do that for you. I will ask my colleague.” When people come to us seeking termination, for example, doctors still have the right to say, “Look, I’m not going to do anything with this, but I will refer you to a colleague.” Those safeguards are there, and I think it is right that those who want to and those who do not want to are given that option—and, as I said, the safeguards already exist. What would be wrong, though, would be for someone to say, “Well, I am against it, and therefore I am not going to do anything about it.” That would not be right, so you would have to have an obligation; it just has to be a conversation where you say, “I will ask my colleague to see you.” You do not even to say, “I’m against it” or anything. That works very well with abortion law at the moment, and it should remain as an option.

• 29 Jan 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q2. I welcome the Government’s action last week to tackle rogue traders who install faulty home insulation, affecting many of my constituents. Does the Prime Minister agree that Labour’s warm homes plan will tackle fuel poverty and bring down bills for families as part of our plan for change?

• 29 Jan 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Can I ask you, Mr Amin, about your views on coercion, particularly in the light of clause 2 in reference to the Mental Health Act 1983 and the Mental Capacity Act, and any thoughts you have about that in relation to the groups you represent? Yogi Amin: As I said, I have worked in this area for over 20 years. I represent individuals week to week in this area and safeguarding is all across what is needed for these individuals. The professionals who are involved in their lives are regulated. We are talking about doctors who are meeting individuals, and they understand what it means to identify safeguarding triggers and where referrals are required. That makes it quite strong in this particular Bill. I am comfortable with the wording as you have it in the Bill, and I say that as someone who has worked in the area for many years. Lawyers will go to court and pick over words, but the way it is drafted, it is understood that there is voluntariness, as described in the Bill, and coercion. I do not think that additional words are necessary to describe what is required here—it is a voluntary, free-will decision, and coercion is defined. When we are talking about a doctor trying to understand that and a court then interpreting it, I think it is pretty clear what that is, so I am comfortable with the way it is drafted. Generally, from a safeguarding perspective, there are, as Tom said, a number of points at which professionals ask individuals for a decision on this over a number of weeks, and it goes into months. There is quite a robust process. I point also to footnote 3 for paragraph 4 of my written evidence, where I have referred to the current existing law outside the Court of Protection, where it might be thought that the person has capacity but there are concerns about coercion and so on. There is, under section 42 of the Care Act 2014, the provision for safeguarding referrals. There is, under section 222 of the Local Government Act 1972, provision for a local authority where referrals are made to bring the matter before the court under the inherent jurisdiction. The inherent jurisdiction does not go away; it is here and available where there are concerns over the safeguarding of an individual to allow them to make their own individual, free-will decision. It is not there to do anything other than protect that individual and have a safety net around them to ensure they can make individual, autonomous decisions. Nothing needs to be tinkered with in the current Bill, because that is there—Parliament has already provided for that. Have I answered your question?

• 29 Jan 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  You have given clarity. Thank you.

• 29 Jan 2025 · Growing the UK Economy · Hansard source

  More

  The Chancellor highlighted the redevelopment of Old Trafford in her speech, but similar investment is happening in Luton, where Power Court is set to be the new home of Luton Town football club. That mixed-use housing and commercial development will bring new opportunities and support the regeneration of our town. May I invite the Minister to join me on a visit to see how that will be a key driver of economic growth across Bedfordshire and the eastern region?

• 28 Jan 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q I want to build on the comments about the multidisciplinary teams that you all work with. The chief medical officer said, in one of the sessions earlier, that discussions about death, dying and end of life are increasing. They are getting better. However, importantly, when we heard from Professor Ranger of the RCN and from the Association of Palliative Care Social Workers, they also talked about the conversations that they have, as part of the wider team. Quite often, it is nurses having those conversations. I was struck by the way the RCN talked—and you, Dr Clarke, used the word as well—about not being paternalistic, about having the patient at the centre of that conversation, and about ensuring that we listen to the patient and ask them, “What is it that you want?” That, for me, is all about autonomy. Do you agree? The emphasis must be on patient autonomy and their choice at the end of life. Dr Clarke: One hundred per cent. Sometimes, those of us who work in palliative care almost see the extent to which we try to place the patient at the centre of everything as quite radical, when contrasted with a lot of the other medical specialities. My opinion about what is best for a patient does not matter; their opinion is what counts. The power of the multidisciplinary team, and the reason for thinking that it may be worth considering amending the Bill so that there is a greater role for a multidisciplinary team, is this: the fact that everybody in that team brings their unique perspective. In my hospital, whenever there is a tricky issue regarding a palliative patient, we will have an MDT. There may be 10 people in the room, all discussing the issues. It might be that someone has decided that they want to withdraw their life-prolonging treatments, or they want to have life-prolonging treatment and, for whatever reason, it is really complicated. We will have the patient, their family, doctors, nurses, social workers and dieticians—a big group of people—in the room because that is the way to make the decision most safely and most effectively, in terms of enabling the patient to have the treatment that they wish to have. It is incredibly important to have that.

• 28 Jan 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Can I ask Mr Sanderson to reflect on that, for the different context, Mr Dowd?

• 27 Jan 2025 · Creative Industries · Hansard source

  More

  I am glad to contribute to the debate, and while I may not have any books with film options, or be a former rockstar, I have family and friends who work in the creative industries, be it in film, music or magazines. Our creative industries are one of the most valuable growth sectors in the UK, generating £125 billion for the economy in 2023 and accounting for one in seven jobs across the country. Perhaps most importantly, the creative industries embedded in our towns and cities have intrinsic cultural value. They provide shared social experiences that contribute to a sense of place, build on local heritage and contribute to our health and wellbeing. Luton has a rich history of artistic innovation, creativity and design. For over 200 years, we were the primary place in the UK for the production of ladies’ hats. The industry peaked in the 1930s, when we produced over 70 million hats annually. Of course, that is why our beloved Luton Town FC are known as the Hatters. Artistry has been at the heart of our town’s economy across three centuries, and we hold on to that with pride today. We are a place of making—historically, hats and cars; now, computer systems, games, films and music. We are lucky enough to have several independent music venues in Luton, including the Hat Factory arts centre, the Bear Club, and the Castle, one of Luton’s oldest and most beloved pubs, which is supporting Independent Venue Week this week. It is putting on six nights of live music and supporting the independent arts, alongside the 200 other venues taking part across the country. We cannot overestimate the value of our grassroots music venues and the platform they give to new and emerging artists, offering them their first opportunities to perform and develop their craft and providing the essential pipeline for tomorrow’s megastars and household names. Indeed, when Luton hosted Radio 1’s Big Weekend in May 2024, one of our town’s very own, Myles Smith, featured on BBC Music’s Introducing stage, and he has since performed on Jools Holland’s show. He broke the United States on tour and won the rising star Brit award, and this year he has been nominated for three Brit awards. That success highlights the value of exposure for independent artists. I was somewhat surprised by the comments from the Opposition Front-Bench spokesperson earlier about supporting arts and culture. I accept the points made by others about the culture recovery fund, but our creative industries were held back under the Tories. Arts funding fell by almost 50% per person in real terms, and local government revenue funding for culture and related services decreased by 48% in England, alongside rising costs and demand pressures on statutory services. Those funding cuts have enacted enormous damage to the pipeline of talent in the industry, to the provision of local arts and to the availability of work in the performing arts. In 2012, university grants delivering courses such as music, drama and other arts subjects were cut by 50%, which was particularly detrimental for disabled, black, Asian and minority ethnic students and students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. That created an additional obstacle for students who already faced multiple barriers to studying subjects such as music in higher education. If we really want to break down barriers to opportunity, we must ensure that there is adequate access to a dedicated arts and music curriculum for students at every point in their education, and I very much welcome the Minister’s earlier comments on that issue. Such access is fundamental not only to support talent to thrive, but to ensure that children develop. Studies have found that children exposed to music tuition display better cognitive performance in their reading and comprehension skills. I thank Luton Music Service and all the volunteer parents for the great work they do with children and young people in my constituency. I would also like to say how much I enjoyed the Christmas performances by the show choir, the senior guitars, the junior strings, the funk band and the rock band, among the many other groups that performed that weekend, who displayed immense talent. I am glad that this Labour Government have recognised the value of our creative industries and that we are working to reverse the damage done under the previous Conservative Government. I welcome the £60 million package of support announced this month to drive growth, including the £40 million investment for start-up video game studios, British music and film exports, and creative businesses outside London. I also welcome the launch of the Soft Power Council, which brings together experts from across culture, sport, the creative industries and geopolitics to showcase the best of Britain around the world. Our creative industries have been underfunded and undervalued for too long, but I am confident that as we prioritise the arts and creative industries within our industrial strategy, the UK will have a firm standing on the world stage, boosting economic growth, unlocking opportunities and leading as industry innovators.

• 20 Jan 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  For fire safety remediation works for buildings over 11 metres, there is a cap on non-cladding costs and leaseholders are given 10 years to pay remediation costs. However, my constituent in a building under 11 metres has been informed that he may have to pay costs within 12 months because the freeholder is a housing association and because of restrictions around credit and debt. Will the Minister meet me to resolve the issue and allow some flexibility?

• 16 Jan 2025 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  We all welcome the news of the ceasefire deal after 15 months of devastating conflict and suffering in Gaza. The Foreign Secretary knows how important the recognition of Palestine and the two-state solution is to my constituents in Luton South and South Bedfordshire. Does he agree that in our Government’s commitment to a two-state solution, Gaza must form part of a future Palestinian state, with no reduction in the size of its territory, no ongoing occupation of Gaza and no forced displacement of Palestinians from Gaza?