Seamus Logan MP: speeches

Speeches

• 14 Apr 2026 · Infected Blood Compensation Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  I pay tribute to the Minister and his team for the great work that they have done. I agree with the right hon. Member for Salisbury (John Glen) that this work is really cross-party, and the Minister will continue to enjoy our support in the future. I would like to raise two matters of detail. One relates to the Hepatitis C Trust, which has welcomed the funding that it has received, but it is only for one year. Owing to the nature of its work and the fact that these cases are likely to go on for several years, will the Minister confirm that organisations such as the Hepatitis C Trust can expect to enjoy funding in future years to enable them to continue to provide support? I also welcome the Minister’s comments on the new level 2B severity banding for people who received interferon treatment, but I would like to raise a couple of points of detail on that. The Minister might not be able to answer them today, but if he could answer them in writing, that would be helpful. Do these new measures remove the 2017 reduction in rates for compensation, and will they ensure that people are fairly compensated for health harms caused by interferon treatment from the date those harms occurred?

• 23 Mar 2026 · Worker Visas: Rural Businesses · Hansard source

  More

  5. What discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on the potential impact of changes to worker visas on businesses in rural economies.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Worker Visas: Rural Businesses · Hansard source

  More

  Sheep shearing may not be on the Home Secretary’s bucket list, but in another U-turn, following pressure from NFU Scotland, the Government have apparently listened to the farming industry and agreed to a sheep shearing visa extension for one year. The Home Secretary is looking a little sheepish in her place, so in order to avoid being accused of woolly thinking, if she cannot commit to a longer-term extension for the farming sector, will she transfer powers to the Scottish Parliament so that farmers, fishers, and the hospitality and care sectors can deal with their labour shortages?

• 16 Mar 2026 · Heating Oil Support · Hansard source

  More

  What are you going to do about it?

• 16 Mar 2026 · Heating Oil Support · Hansard source

  More

  More than 130,000 homes in Scotland now face deeper anxiety and financial uncertainty with this paltry intervention from the Government. The reality of this cold winter and spring in the north of Scotland and in the highlands and islands, not least in my constituency, is that there was snow last night. The gritters were out, and some people now face hypothermia as they struggle with the massive increase in costs. With more price increases in the supermarkets, higher fuel costs, rising inflation and growing extreme fuel poverty in Scottish households as this illegal war continues, I ask the Minister whether the Government will now commit to a more robust plan, including further interventions later this year.

• 11 Mar 2026 · Disability Equipment Provision · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with the hon. Member, and that highlights the need for a national strategy and a review of the current organisational arrangements. Age UK has noted that, due to a lack of national guidelines on timelines, long waiting lists are common, partly due to shortages in that noble profession, occupational therapists. To mitigate the situation, multiple organisations have been set up with the sole purpose of supporting those in need of disability equipment in the face of a failing system. They include Back Up, a UK-wide charity that works with people affected by spinal cord injury and provides vital wheelchair skills training. The Motability Foundation has awarded £36.4 million in grants to customers of its Motability scheme to help them access adequate and good-quality equipment, as many people have resorted to self-funding permanent or temporary equipment. The foundation has also conducted an economic assessment of wheelchair provision in England and recommended that greater integration across services is needed to prevent variation in the quality of provision. In Scotland, the handling of disability equipment and adaptations is carried out by integrated authorities—united bodies in which local authorities and NHS services work together to provide more cohesive and community-focused health and social care planning. To guide those bodies, the Scottish Government agreed a memorandum of understanding some years ago, setting out a standardised approach for the provision of equipment to maintain consistency across all local councils. During engagement with voluntary organisations in this field, I was told that the Scottish approach is paying dividends. I recommend to the Minister that a similar approach should be considered for implementation in England and Wales, because the system needs change now. Thousands of people across the UK are sick, sore and tired of being unheard after countless complaints. When will their voices be taken seriously? Greater national leadership is urgently needed to put an end to the insecure and uncertain system in which someone’s ability to obtain necessary life-supporting equipment is based on where they live rather than their need. Everyone has a right to access disability equipment and live a safe and independent life. The pressure is on the UK Government to step up and redesign the system, and respond to the many calls to establish a national strategy. A consolidated approach holds the potential to improve oversight, reduce waiting times and ensure consistent and reliable access to disability equipment for everyone, no matter where they might live, so let me pose just one simple question to the Minister: in responding to the debate, will he please set out the reasons why he would not agree to take forward a national strategy in this area?

• 11 Mar 2026 · Disability Equipment Provision · Hansard source

  More

  I do agree. Indeed, that problem causes a massive cost to the taxpayer as well. It is no surprise that 74% of equipment providers were aware of patients experiencing delayed hospital discharge due to unavailable community equipment. The APPG’s report recommended and called for the implementation of a national strategy to ensure the cohesive and comprehensive delivery, monitoring and financing of disability equipment. Complaints about the current system and provision of equipment have been reported by various other organisations, including the UK charity for young wheelchair users, Whizz Kidz, which described wheelchair services as “underfunded, inaccessible, and fractured.” In June 2025, it was reported that Citizens Advice receives a new complaint about faulty aids every hour. My own pedigree in this area goes back many years—in fact, to 1996, when I first joined a health and personal social services commissioning organisation, under the leadership of my great friends Mary Wilmont and Kevin Keenan, both former directors of social services in Northern Ireland. We examined in great detail the wheelchair services, and services for people who were deaf or blind, hard of hearing or visually impaired. One report stands out in my memory—not because I authored it, but because it was a simple idea to address the challenges facing people in getting to a hospital appointment. We called it “Getting There”. That was 30 years ago. Although this Government need to “get there”, the challenges in the existing system are more profound. In England and Wales, the provision of equipment is currently run by the NHS and local authorities, which are primarily responsible for facilitating care needs assessments and subsequently approving and providing equipment. As a result, available equipment, the length of waiting times and the quality of adaptations are increasingly becoming a postcode lottery.

• 11 Mar 2026 · Disability Equipment Provision · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered the provision of disability equipment. I am grateful to the Speaker’s Office, which oversees the ballot that leads to the selection of debate topics. I am truly very pleased to have secured this debate to provide us all with the opportunity to shine a light on the issues that many people across the country are facing in accessing disability equipment. I particularly welcome Milana Hadji-Touma, who is representing herself and a number of others today; I thank her for attending. I also thank the 653 people who have shared their experiences and provided moving testimonials, which have been invaluable in my preparation for this debate. I appreciate the time and energy that has gone into each response, and I reiterate my thanks and appreciation for all those who contributed. I want to begin by offering some quotes from the responses, including some from my constituents: “My daughter had to wait two years for her wheelchair.” “I wouldn’t be able to function without my stairlift, my powered wheelchair and my crutches.” “It is about my safety, my dignity and my ability to live independently.” “I use a shower chair and a toilet frame which might seem small items but they have transformed my day to day safety and confidence.” “With the correct equipment, I was able to complete a master's degree at a top university, become a teacher, learn to drive, hand cycle across eleven countries and live a full and rich life.” Around 25% of the UK population are disabled, so access to disability equipment is essential. It alleviates everyday struggles and allows thousands of people to live safe and independent lives, which boosts personal confidence and mental wellbeing. Whether it is wheelchairs, living aids or home-adaptation items like grab rails, the devices offer numerous and powerful benefits, transforming lives so that the activities of daily life become more manageable, both for those dealing with disabling conditions and for those who provide care, including family members, friends and care workers. Those benefits were echoed throughout my survey. One respondent stated: “My disability equipment is my entire life”, while another reported: “It simplifies tasks, turns impossible activities into manageable ones with the right support, eases physical pain, reduces moments of embarrassment or vulnerability, and—most importantly—fosters greater independence and less dependence on others.” Despite the benefits, 64% of respondents revealed that waiting times for disability equipment were longer than expected. As I said, one person reported that their daughter waited for a wheelchair for nearly two years, while one of my constituents highlighted the issues that arise from delayed equipment provision, stating: “Without proper assessment and provision, disabled people can be left living in environments that actively worsen their health or place them at risk of injury.” The testimonies I have shared show that there is a growing belief that the system to provide disability equipment is becoming increasingly unsustainable. With complaints about waiting times, quality of equipment and poor communication around access, it is no surprise that over 650 people responded to my survey in the space of four days. In addition, hundreds more people gave testimonies to inform the latest report from the all-party parliamentary group for access to disability equipment, published last October. Among stories of frustration and disappointment, the report revealed that 63% of carers and 55% of equipment users felt that services were getting worse.

• 11 Mar 2026 · Disability Equipment Provision · Hansard source

  More

  The breadth of the debate today has demonstrated that an hour is simply not enough to deal with this topic. As the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) said, housing and domestic adaptations are a topic all on their own, as is access to work under the DWP. There is also transport to consider; we could have spoken about transport issues for hours. I am disappointed by the number of Members present for the debate, but of course it has been a very busy day so it is perfectly understandable. However, I encourage colleagues who are present, especially the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings, to try to raise this topic with the Backbench Business Committee so that we can get this whole discussion into the main Chamber in future. I particularly thank the chair of the APPG, the hon. Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis), as well as all Members who have contributed to the debate today, especially the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire), the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans), and the Minister himself. It has been a very busy day for the Government—even a difficult day, at times—so I appreciate his time and the passion with which he spoke about this topic. He genuinely wants to see improvement in this area. If the July 2025 new plan for disability can bring forward a framework, strategy or improvement, we would all very much endorse that. Finally, I thank the Chamber engagement team. We sometimes take them for granted, but they are responsible for helping parliamentarians such as myself to bring informed debates to the main Chamber and Westminster Hall. I thank them very sincerely. With that, I will close. Question put and agreed to. Resolved , That this House has considered the provision of disability equipment.

• 9 Mar 2026 · Immigration Policy · Hansard source

  More

  At lunch time today I chaired a meeting of the all-party parliamentary group on fisheries, during which we heard about existential threats to the fishing industry across these islands. Will the Minister agree to attend a meeting of the APPG so that he can hear at first hand about some of the threats posed by his party’s immigration policies?

• 9 Mar 2026 · Type 1 Diabetes: Infant Testing · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. I thank the hon. Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) for opening this important debate, and I pay tribute to the members of the public present, who no doubt represent thousands of people online tonight. The Lyla’s law campaign is a powerful reminder of the devastating consequences of missed or delayed diagnosis for type 1 diabetes in children and young people. It calls for improved education and guaranteed routine testing for children showing early symptoms before they reach diabetic ketoacidosis, which is a life-threatening condition that requires emergency hospital care. Many families and parents learn about their children’s condition only once they have reached this potentially fatal stage. Not only is that traumatic and dangerous, putting a child’s life at risk, but it creates avoidable costs and puts strain on emergency healthcare services. Families should not have to wait for those serious complications to occur for a diagnosis to be made. Despite this, the UK Government claim that there is still “insufficient evidence” to support routine mandatory testing for type 1 diabetes in babies, toddlers and young children. That is why the petition is so important. It calls for existing NHS guidance, which recommends the immediate testing of children and young people showing symptoms of type 1 diabetes—the fours Ts, which have been mentioned—to be formally legislated for. Current guidance alone is clearly not enough, and a standardised approach for all GPs and doctors is urgently needed. A member of the Insulin Pump Awareness Group in Scotland recently wrote to me mentioning that they often wonder whether their own diagnosis 29 years ago would have been picked up had they not been made aware of the four Ts symptoms through family.

• 9 Mar 2026 · Type 1 Diabetes: Infant Testing · Hansard source

  More

  I completely agree with the hon. Member and endorse his suggestion. This topic is personally important to me, not only because so many family members have been diagnosed with type 1 diabetes but—as the hon. Member for Edinburgh North and Leith (Tracy Gilbert) referred to—because of the premature death in 2022 of my nephew Nick Logan from complications arising from his original diagnosis at the age of 16. Italy made history in 2023 by becoming the first country to introduce nationwide screening for the early detection of type 1 diabetes in children. In 2021, Scotland also led the way by being the first country to offer C-peptide blood tests to everyone with diabetes to address misdiagnosis. Although that may not be the same as a routine screening programme for type 1 diabetes, it demonstrates how routine testing can be implemented. Childhood type 1 diabetes rates in the UK are among the highest in the world, ranking fifth globally for children aged 14 and under, according to the International Diabetes Federation. In conclusion, it is essential that the UK Government take a more targeted and strategic approach to improving the care and diagnosis of children and young people showing type 1 diabetes symptoms. That starts with the implementation of routine testing—

• 3 Mar 2026 · Sudan: Humanitarian Situation · Hansard source

  More

  The Foreign Secretary has referred to the UN report published on 19 February, which said that the horrific events in El Fasher bore all the “hallmarks of genocide”. Does she agree with that assessment?

• 11 Feb 2026 · Hughes Report: Second Anniversary · Hansard source

  More

  I appreciate the complexities of the steps that the Minister is outlining. Nevertheless, in repeated contributions, Members have asked for a timescale, so will the Minister respond by the end of the Session? Will she respond by the autumn? Will she respond by the end of the calendar year? Can she give us some clarification, please?

• 11 Feb 2026 · Hughes Report: Second Anniversary · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham (Sarah Green) for securing the debate. On behalf of constituents who have written to me, I want to begin by quoting the comments of the Patient Safety Commissioner for England, Professor Hughes, to the BBC when her report was released two years ago: “These families weren’t listened to by a system that really turned its back, and fobbed them off with information which led to them not only being harmed, but thousands of others being harmed.” The Hughes report has still not received a proper response—from either the Conservative Government or current Labour Government—and that is the key. That is deeply disappointing and a massive let-down for all those women and children affected by this scandal. I appreciate that this is an important issue, and it warrants due process, but there has been a two-year wait for a response, not to mention that the wait for the families affected has been so much longer. Although the Patient Safety Commissioner’s remit extends to England only, this is a UK-wide issue. The regulation of human medicines and medicinal products is reserved. The report said that the Department of Health and Social Care should “engage with the devolved governments” on where and how the two-stage redress approach should apply across the UK. The UK Government have indicated that those conversations are taking place. That is encouraging, and I hope that it continues, but we in Scotland have been disappointed by this Government more than once. The well-worn saying applies: justice delayed is justice denied. This Government promised change, and here is a case in point. The unreserved apology offered by the previous Government in July 2021 was welcome, as was the invitation in December 2022 “to look at what a potential redress scheme could look like.” —[ Official Report , 7 December 2022; Vol. 724, c. 478.] But that was more than three years ago. Of course, this Government rightly deserve praise for acting to redress the problem and offer compensation, albeit slowly in some cases, following the infected blood scandal and the Post Office Horizon scandal. Please do not add this situation to that of the Women Against State Pension Inequality Campaign, the nuclear test veterans and others, where successive Governments have taken a negligent approach. In summary, I am speaking up primarily on behalf of my constituents. We need urgent action on this report and a proper system of redress for the countless families affected by this scandal. Please let us get on with addressing recommendation 4 of the Hughes report without delay. I hope the Minister will address that in her response.

• 5 Feb 2026 · Occupied Palestinian Territories: Genocide Risk Assessment · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber (Brendan O'Hara) for securing this important debate, and I highlight that this is only the second time that a Backbench Business debate on Gaza has taken place in this Chamber. The reaction of the UK Government since they came into office has been, at best, supine, or at worst, grossly negligent. They have responded to UN independent international commissions of inquiry in other contexts, such as Ukraine—and rightly so—but they have failed to do so on Gaza. Back in September 2025, the UN’s “Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory” found that Israel had committed a genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.

• 5 Feb 2026 · Occupied Palestinian Territories: Genocide Risk Assessment · Hansard source

  More

  I completely agree with the hon. Lady. In recent days, we have learned that the IDF has admitted its role in the death of at least 70,000 Palestinians. Meanwhile, Secretary-General António Guterres warns us that, as we enter 2026, the clock is ticking louder than ever, with conditions on the ground in Palestine remaining perilously fragile. Only yesterday, a UN committee mandated to promote the realisation of Palestinian rights reaffirmed calls for a two-state solution, which Secretary-General Guterres endorsed as the only viable path towards achieving long-lasting peace and security between Palestine and Israel. However, in this context, at least another 449 men, women and children have been killed by Israeli forces during the so-called ceasefire. Why can the UK Government not see what the UN can? Why do they accept the UN’s reports on Ukraine, but not Gaza? Why do they not accept the conclusions of UK-based lawyers, including Supreme Court justices, who signed a letter to the Prime Minister in May last year to confirm that a genocide is being perpetrated? I wish to turn to the letter that I and 57 other parliamentarians have signed, led by the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden), explaining to the Secretary of State for Business and Trade that we are extremely concerned by the Government’s apparent move towards unblocking arms licences to Israel, which they had suspended in September 2024, and the transfer of new F-35s from a British airbase. This is at odds with the Government’s international legal obligations, including the genocide convention. I hope the Minister will be able to explain that decision, given the ongoing violation of the ceasefire by Israeli forces in Gaza, which is continuing the genocidal horror of these past two and a half years. When talk of peace involves the perpetrators of violence and not the violated—not the voices of those who have lost so much on all sides—war crimes will go unpunished and festering wounds of injustice will lead to further conflict. The Prime Minister, as a former human rights lawyer, must understand that. Why then, given everything that we know, and all that we have witnessed, do his Government remain in a state of ambivalence on assessments of genocide under international law in Palestine? Does the clue to the answer lie in this Government’s protection of trade and diplomatic ties to Israel and the US?

• 5 Feb 2026 · Sudan · Hansard source

  More

  I salute the Foreign Secretary’s commitment and passion on this topic, and congratulate her on her recent efforts. She has already mentioned the UK’s role as the penholder at the UN Security Council. With that in mind, I am sure she agrees that without the inclusion of Sudanese civic society, a long-term, peaceful and democratic resolution simply cannot be achieved. However, is the Foreign Secretary planning to support the African Union-led quintet initiative—which involves multilateral organisations, including the UN—to bring together Sudanese political parties and civil society to agree a joint position on a peaceful, civilian-led political transition? If so, what steps is she taking to support that initiative?

• 3 Feb 2026 · Animals in Science Regulation Unit: Annual Report 2024 · Hansard source

  More

  I completely agree; that is the point that I am trying to draw out. There were 2,646 procedures on dogs and 1,936 on non-human primates. Examples include non-human primates being subjected to invasive brain surgery and deprived of fluid to induce them to perform behavioural tasks and mice being given psychostimulant rewards such as cocaine or amphetamines—and this, under licence conditions. However, the ASRU report highlighted instances in which compliance with these licence conditions was not followed; there have been failures to provide adequate care and failure to provide food and water, which are the most basic welfare needs of animals being held in laboratories across the UK. In one very distressing incident, it is reported that a mother was removed from its cage and killed, resulting in unweaned pups starving to death. In 2024, there were 146 cases of non-compliance in British laboratories, a 16% decrease from the 169 cases reported in 2023.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Animals in Science Regulation Unit: Annual Report 2024 · Hansard source

  More

  I thank all hon. Members who have spoken, including the hon. Member for Newport West and Islwyn (Ruth Jones), the hon. Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman)—a colleague who is no longer here once referred to him as the Member for aloha—and the hon. Members for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell), for Stockport (Navendu Mishra), for North Cornwall (Ben Maguire) and for Rutland and Stamford (Alicia Kearns). I also thank the Minister for her very thoughtful response. I cannot think of many topics on which there is such a tremendous cross-party alliance, which has included the Democratic Unionist party, the Scottish National party, the Liberal Democrats and many Labour Members. As the Minister said, virtually no MP would disagree with our intent here, so that is very encouraging. I am particularly interested in a couple of the Minister’s comments. She said that where a non-animal alternative exists, no approval should be given—absolutely. She drew attention to the need to move as quickly as the science allows. I am sure the chair of the APPG, the hon. Member for North Ayrshire and Arran, noted her invitation to meet Lord Vallance to discuss these issues. That would be very welcome indeed. It simply remains for me to mention my own little pet cockapoo, Lola. Anyone who knows anything about dogs know how sentient and clever they are. They have an amazing vocabulary, and they can count. The only thing they cannot do is speak—more’s the pity—although that is maybe not a bad thing in some ways. I will conclude by thanking everyone who took part, and the members of the public who attended.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Animals in Science Regulation Unit: Annual Report 2024 · Hansard source

  More

  I completely agree, although the hon. Member is addressing the wider issue of animal welfare, while my focus today is on this report. Nevertheless, he is absolutely right. I was talking about non-compliance. The cases involved more than 22,000 animals, including mice, rats, fish, cows, sheep, frogs, guinea pigs, bats, dogs, non-human primates, cats, a hamster and a rabbit. I might add that those are the reported incidents; 68 establishment audits were conducted for the report but only 3% of cases of non-compliance were identified by audits and 69% were self-reported. That can hardly be described as a robust inspection system. In 75% of cases—three quarters—the only sanction was “inspector advice”. The ASRU is responsible for licensing animal experiments in the UK, to protect animals in science and ensure compliance with the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. That means following the principles known as the three Rs: replacement, reduction and refinement. In other words, use non-animal methods where possible, reduce the number used to a minimum and refine procedures to minimise suffering. I know from visits undertaken by the APPG, which I referred to earlier, that there is a growing use of laboratory-grown human tissue in experimentation, which we need to support as parliamentarians. The UK Government have stated: “The Home Office is in the final stages of delivering a comprehensive programme of regulatory reform to further strengthen the Animals in Science Regulation Unit (ASRU), ensuring confidence in the regulatory system and maintaining robust compliance with the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.” Those reforms include increasing the number of full-time inspectors by March this year, but I would argue that that internal reform does not go far enough. The incidence of non-compliance shows that increasing the number of inspectors alone may not result in meaningful change. I mentioned that 2.64 million procedures are taking place each year. We cannot rely solely on a few more full-time inspectors to turn the situation around; I note that the Minister is listening carefully to what I am saying. Labour’s publication last November of its strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternatives to the use of animals in science is very welcome, but meaningful change will not occur without a series of more robust measures. I believe that the difficulty is that the UK is in danger of falling behind other international partners—in the European Union and, interestingly, in the US, which is speeding forward within three to five years to remove the requirement for animals to be used in research. It is strange that we appear to be falling behind internationally in this instance. Although the strategy is committed to increasing funding for human-specific technologies, founding a UK centre for the validation of alternative methods and setting up a cross-Government ministerial Committee to oversee implementation, it contains no timeline for phasing out all animal experiments. We on the APPG on phasing out animal experiments have discussed implementing Herbie’s law as a practical pathway to phase out animal testing, in collaboration with the scientific community. Legal experts have prepared a draft of Herbie’s law, entitled the human-specific technologies bill, describing how Government could ensure progress and how scientists could be supported, with detail on setting up an expert advisory committee to give specialist advice on animal replacement. I think I speak for many attending the debate when I say that we are keen to see an end to animal suffering in medical research. The ASRU report’s findings are a stark reminder of what is at stake for animals when the law is broken, when licence conditions are not followed or when measures to ensure compliance are not as robust as they could be. The UK has an opportunity not only to secure our position as a global leader in animal protection and scientific innovation, but to end animal suffering in scientific research. That can be ensured only through a full transition from animal experimentation across the next decade. The ASRU report is a stark reminder that until that transition is in place, we will continue to fail animals in laboratories across the UK.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Animals in Science Regulation Unit: Annual Report 2024 · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered the Animals in Science Regulation Unit annual report 2024. It is always a pleasure to serve under you, Sir John, and it is a pleasure to introduce this debate. It concerns the use of animals in scientific research and the most recent Animals in Science Regulation Unit annual report for 2024, which was published in December 2025. The subject is important to me, to many of my constituents and possibly to up to half the population of these islands who have the pleasure—nay, the privilege—of sharing their lives with a pet. I pay tribute to the work of the hon. Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell), who leads the all-party parliamentary group on phasing out animal experiments in medical research, as well as to the work of Animal Free Research UK and its chief executive, Carla Owen, who is in the Public Gallery and was behind the Herbie’s law campaign. Herbie has unfortunately passed, but the campaign lives on. I also want to thank Cruelty Free International, which continues to champion the ending of animal research worldwide. In this debate, I want to focus on the weak oversight of the regulations, which has led to shocking failures to protect animals from undue suffering; that has been highlighted in the Home Office report. The findings show just how much we are failing to prevent animals from suffering when they are used in scientific experiments, due to the incidence of non-compliance with the law or with licence conditions. The report focuses on numerous incidents from across 2024, which sadly included animals that have starved to death or drowned. Other animals were put into waste bags by mistake and others were kept alive beyond humane endpoints. The incidents in the report make for upsetting reading. I am a supporter of phasing out animal experimentation in medical research, and I believe this transition should be completed urgently. The very least we can do in the meantime for those animals used in laboratories is to ensure their welfare and minimise their suffering. It is important to put the issue in context. In 2024, 2.64 million procedures using animals took place in UK labs: five animals used in research every minute of every day, representing a decrease of only 1.21% from 2023.

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

  More

  Yesterday, in response to a question from the hon. Member for Glasgow West (Patricia Ferguson), the Deputy Prime Minister made a statement in the Chamber that was incorrect, misleading and disrespectful to Lord Brodie—

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

  More

  I apologise, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Deputy Prime Minister made a statement in the Chamber that was incorrect, inadvertently misleading and disrespectful to Lord Brodie, who is chairing a public inquiry into events at the Queen Elizabeth University hospital in Glasgow. He stated that the Scottish Government had “sided with the health board and dismissed families who went through tragic circumstances.” —[ Official Report , 28 January 2026; Vol. 779, c. 900.] That is categorically untrue, given that it was the SNP Scottish Government who set up the public inquiry. [ Interruption. ] Worse, it was a naked pre-election smear and an act of desperation on behalf of the Labour party, which is struggling to make third place in the polls. What does the Leader of the House propose to do to put a stop to Ministers coming to the Dispatch Box and repeating falsehoods, and will he call on the Deputy Prime Minister to apologise for undermining Lord Brodie?

• 27 Jan 2026 · Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The Secretary of State knows that the SNP believes that this is a pragmatic Bill that will have a net-positive outcome for the health service in Scotland. We welcome the Bill and are glad to support it. However, there are specialty fields, such as general practice, which have a high number of international graduates. Because of Government policy, there are significant challenges in supporting the retention of some individuals. For example, the new requirement for settled status is 10 years with some exceptions, whereas training programmes are often only three years long. I am sure that the Secretary of State does not want the UK to be a hostile environment for our vital overseas medical staff. Will he therefore make representations to the Home Office so that it is aware of the anomaly?