Sarah Smith MP: speeches

Speeches

• 21 Oct 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  As you may be aware, Mr Speaker, Reform-led Lancashire county council has opened a consultation on the future of care homes across Lancashire, including the proposal to close Woodlands care home in my constituency of Hyndburn. Will the Minister join me in urging Lancashire county council not to take forward these proposals, to protect much-valued local services, and to keep care close to the community and to the amazing staff who support our residents in Woodlands care home?

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

  More

  Does the Leader of the House agree that access to high-quality residential care close to home is essential for the dignity and wellbeing of our elderly constituents? In Clayton-le-Moors, the Reform-led Lancashire county council is consulting on the future of Woodlands care home, causing deep concern to residents, their families and the incredible staff. The council is providing no information about what it might do if it were to close the home. Will the Leader of the House join me in urging the council to keep Woodlands care home open?

• 14 Oct 2025 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome yesterday’s ceasefire agreement and the Prime Minister’s statement today, and I recognise the leadership that he and his Ministers have shown on this issue so tirelessly and for such a long time. We know that sustaining the peace is dependent on humanitarian services scaling up rapidly in Gaza, and many NGOs are struggling with Israel’s restrictive and politicised new registration measures, which are leaving many in limbo and unable to work alongside UN agencies to scale up those services. What is the Prime Minister doing to ensure that we address and tackle that and ensure that the needs of Palestinians are met as quickly as possible?

• 13 Oct 2025 · Baby Loss · Hansard source

  More

  Baby Loss Awareness Week is an opportunity for those affected by baby loss to remember and commemorate their babies’ lives and to highlight this deeply important subject. I am glad to see that we are doing just that in this debate, and has it not been possibly the best of our Chamber? I pay particular tribute to my hon. Friends the Members for Sherwood Forest (Michelle Welsh) and Rossendale and Darwen (Andy MacNae) for their very moving tributes, which started the debate. Every year in the UK, as we have heard, thousands of families are affected by the heartbreak of baby loss. It is a grief that is often invisible to the outside world and too often a silent trauma, but for those living with it, the impact is lifelong. It touches every aspect of their being —emotional, physical, psychological and spiritual—and the structures must be in place for those who need support following the loss of their baby. In my constituency of Hyndburn and Haslingden, the staff at East Lancashire Hospitals NHS trust do a fantastic job. They are signed up to the national bereavement pathways, but as we have heard, that is not a statutory requirement. I hope that the Secretary of State will consider making it a statutory requirement, so that access to psychological support is not a postcode lottery. With rising demands on maternity services, additional staffing is required so that every family who experiences birth trauma or baby loss can get the support that they need. Thanks to some work that was undertaken by a number of leading experts at the University of Lancashire, including my brilliant constituent who is the perinatal mental health lead at East Lancs Hospital trust, Clare Yates, they developed an evidence-based birth and reproductive trauma debrief service that has been designed to ensure that every family could receive that support across East Lancashire, and it is ready for implementation. Given the limited resources and staffing, we have not been able to roll it out, but I hope that events such as today’s debate and the renewed focus on this issue from the Secretary of State might change that, so that the enhanced service can be offered to give the care and support that families desperately need. Up and down the country, there are competing uses for maternal funds, with the result that, unfortunately, trauma, mental health and bereavement support often get overlooked, with greater importance given to physical health. Holistic baby loss trauma services make a profound difference, and we must recognise that supporting families through baby loss is absolutely essential care, so I urge the Secretary of State to do all he can to ensure the highest possible level of care in maternity services, including in the devastating circumstances of miscarriage or baby loss, and to ensure that that support is there for everyone who is unfortunate to experience it.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Children with SEND: Assessments and Support · Hansard source

  More

  Since the new Government came in, there have been significant changes and investment coming forward, but we all understand the urgency. I am sure the Minister will respond by emphasising how she wants to take forward this important agenda—although it is not an agenda at all; it is about meeting the needs of our most vulnerable children, and the families who most need us as a Government to deliver. There has been no apology from Reform about the state of the Lancashire county council situation, which I find utterly appalling. An apology is the least that parents might expect as they endeavour to proceed with changes locally. I would welcome the Minister outlining in her response how we can end the postcode lottery that we have heard about time and again, to ensure that every child is at an inclusive school, with their needs met, and that every child across this country has a fair and equal chance to realise their potential and build a fulfilling and full life

• 15 Sept 2025 · Children with SEND: Assessments and Support · Hansard source

  More

  It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Huq. I am pleased to contribute to the debate, because the petition speaks to the level of anxiety and concern that many parents and carers of children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities are currently carrying. That is why I am pleased that the Government have shared that any changes we make to the system will stop parents having to fight for support and, importantly, protect provision that is currently in place. That is reassurance for the parents and carers in Hyndburn. We find ourselves in a bizarre and damaging place: the adversarial process that families must go through to access support for their child, often before their child can even get access to support in schools, has not only led to an existential financial crisis for councils, but traumatised parents and carers. I am sure many in the Public Gallery can attest to that from their own experiences. We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to end this adversarial system, which does not work for children, parents or teachers, and to build an inclusive education system to benefit our teachers, children and young people. The system is truly broken in Lancashire, where Reform currently leads our county council. It is failing far too many families. I was not surprised to see 280 signatories from Hyndburn, many of whom I have met either in my surgeries or at the SEND roundtables that I have held. Just last Friday, I visited one of the most inclusive mainstream primary schools in my constituency, which had had to purchase a portacabin out of its own budget because it had no support from the county council to support eight non-verbal children between reception and year 2 who, as I witnessed, needed personal care and significant support. I met one of the parents, who had received an EHC plan from the council that morning telling her that her child did not meet the threshold to go into specialist provision, and another child who had been waiting three years to get a plan at all.

• 10 Sept 2025 · Occupied Palestinian Territories: Humanitarian Access · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I am very grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy (Melanie Ward) for securing this much-needed debate. We have seen 44,000 children being treated for malnutrition, 2,146 people killed while seeking aid, 131 children killed by a man-made famine, and 5,700 acres of land stolen by the Israeli army in the last three months alone in the west bank. The violence in the west bank is repellent, and a flood of aid—no less—is required in Gaza. I think we all now struggle to find the words to articulate just how horrific what is happening in Gaza and across the west bank truly is. I will use my time to ask some questions of the Minister. President Trump is due in the UK next week, and he has said that he is not happy with the “real starvation” he is seeing. How can we further work with the US Administration to encourage Israel to open up the Occupied Palestinian Territories to aid at scale and at an unhindered pace? Ministers have stated that the humanitarian situation in Gaza is “incompatible with the principles that underpin our bilateral relationship” —[ Official Report , 20 May 2025; Vol. 767, c. 924.] and they are prepared to take “further action”. As the road map on UK-Israel relations is being reviewed, what further action can be taken now to help alleviate the immediate humanitarian catastrophe?

• 9 Sept 2025 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Diego Garcia is not just another military facility; it is the cornerstone of Britain’s national security and our most important contribution to the UK-US security relationship. From tracking terrorist networks to ensuring freedom of navigation and global trade, the base has saved lives and safeguarded our people. Let us be clear, however, that the reason we are here today is the failures of the Conservative Government on defence and foreign policy. For years, they dithered, delayed and mismanaged. They gambled with a capability that no other site on earth can replicate and with our security. Some 85% of the negotiations that delivered the treaty took place under the Conservatives. The right hon. Member for Braintree (Sir James Cleverly), then Foreign Secretary, launched the process and the right hon. Member for North West Essex (Mrs Badenoch), now the Leader of the Opposition, sat at the Cabinet table, received the same security briefings and never raised objections—not in Parliament, in written questions or on social media. They knew then, as we know now, that without a treaty Diego Garcia was at risk of being made inoperable. They knew the dangers of hostile powers exploiting the vacuum and of our ability to berth submarines and patrol the region being fatally compromised. Today, however, the Opposition have been unable to answer the basic question of why they started the negotiations. They tried to present the argument that they stopped the negotiations, yet in April 2024 Lord Cameron wrote to the hon. Member for Rutland and Stamford (Alicia Kearns) to say that “the future administration of the islands” was “subject to ongoing bilateral negotiations”. Shortly following that, there was a general election. In opposition, those same people posture against a deal that they once championed. They offer no alternative—no plan, no strategy; just opportunism. They play politics with the safety of the British people. That is not leadership; it is pure hypocrisy. By contrast, the Labour Government have delivered a treaty that secures 99 years of guaranteed access, with the option of extending it for another 40 years. We have secured rock-solid safeguards: full UK control over the base, command of the electromagnetic spectrum, a 24-nautical-mile buffer zone to protect operations and a ban on any foreign military presence in the wider archipelago. Crucially, the treaty is backed by our allies. The United States welcomes it, with President Trump calling it a “very long term, powerful lease”. Our Five Eyes partners, as well as India, all back it, because they recognise what the Conservatives once admitted but now deny: it is irreplaceable. We must also address the position taken by Reform UK, whose Members have all vacated the Chamber for the debate that they proclaim to be so important. The hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) and his colleagues loudly claimed that the United States would reject the agreement, and they told the British people that President Trump would oppose it outright, but they were embarrassingly wrong. The United States has welcomed the deal and President Trump has said that it is “very strong” and “very long term”. Once again, Reform UK misread our closest ally and talked Britain down. Parading as patriots, their instincts are to undermine alliances and weaken the very partnerships that keep this country safe. Let us be clear that, when put in context, the costs are modest and represent less than 0.2% of the annual defence budget. To put them into greater context, the cost of the whole deal is less than the cost of the unused PPE in the first year of covid under the Tory Government. The Conservative party had 14 years in Government to get this right, but it instead wasted billions of pounds on defence mismanagement while leaving the future of our most critical base to hang by a thread. This Labour Government have secured it for a century, protected our people, supported the Chagossian community and strengthened Britain’s alliances. To oppose the Bill is to abandon the base, and to abandon the base is to abandon Britain’s security. I will not do that. I urge all Members to support the Bill and to put the safety of the British people above the short-term games of a divided Opposition and the reckless posturing of Reform UK.

• 2 Sept 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T7. I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement yesterday and the Government’s commitment to recognising the state of Palestine later this month, but with the attacks on the Nasser hospital last week and over 119 children now having died due to starvation, what further steps are we taking to evacuate the most vulnerable? Furthermore, while stacks of aid are unable to get through to Gaza, is the Foreign Secretary keeping under review the use of further sanctions to put greater pressure on Israel to end the blockade of this life-sustaining provision?