Siobhain McDonagh MP: speeches

Speeches

• 9 Feb 2026 · Brain Tumour Survival Rates · Hansard source

  More

  Together with a number of Members here, I met representatives of Servier, and people are now in receipt of vorasidenib. I would be happy to talk to the hon. Lady about how we went about that. On its own, foundational research is not enough for the people who will be diagnosed with glioblastoma this year, next year or in the next decade. There are existing drugs that we can use, but the system provides little incentive to repurpose them for small patient populations, and there is little prestige in doing so. This is, at heart, a market failure. There are only two routes to more trials. One is the public and charitable route, which requires a real change in priorities and funding, and a pivot towards trying repurposed drugs. The other is the private sector, which will not deliver for rare cancers without intervention. If we want commercial trials for rare cancers, we must be honest about the tools available to us. Either we require pharmaceutical companies to test major cancer drugs on rare cancers, or we incentivise them to do so. There is no third way—and that is painful for a Blairite like me to say. I hope that the national cancer plan will signal real change. Without our Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, and without the cancer Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton), there would be no rare cancer chapter in the national plan. However, if the current system carries on, we will be having this debate forever, without progress, and our loved ones will continue to die in shocking circumstances. That is why this debate matters, and why a shake-up is not radical, but long overdue.

• 15 Jan 2026 · Food Inflation · Hansard source

  More

  In order to get everybody in, I ask Members to adhere to a discretionary five-minute limit on speeches. I call Katie Lam.

• 15 Jan 2026 · Food Inflation · Hansard source

  More

  I am very sorry to say this, but it would be great if the two final Back Benchers could stick to about four minutes.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Advanced Brain Cancer: Tissue Freezing · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for all the work she does; it is thrilling to hear that her brother-in-law has made such progress with the Oncotherm machine. The machine is in the UK because my sister raised the funds to bring it over, but it cannot go into an NHS hospital because it cannot get approval from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, so it is for people who can raise the money to access it, as she rightly says. Forty thousand pounds is a lot of money, but in this world it is only a fraction of what other possible treatments may cost; people sell their homes, spend their pensions and leave themselves completely bankrupt on the death of a loved one. It is the wild west out there, as she knows. We have established a trial at UCLH, and we have encouraging early indicators, but we need to do so much more. Our hope is to do 10 trials with repurposed drugs, and we want to clarify how we can bid for the money from the NIHR. We are not the only people doing this—we are not exceptional. Patients and families who see the lack of alternatives are getting involved and raising money, as the hon. Member just said, but anything we can raise is insignificant in comparison with what the Government or big pharma can raise. How is it that, upon Tessa Jowell’s death, the previous Government can have given the NIHR £40 million for research, in good faith, and none of it has been spent on testing out repurposed drugs? I am grateful that in yesterday’s debate the Minister highlighted the letter that I received from the head of the NIHR, Lucy Chappell, setting out the routes for funding and how they can be accessed. As a result of that debate, I went back to read the letter. It does not take us any further; the funding routes are still impossible to navigate in any effective way. I therefore thank the Minister for her commitment to provide further guidance. I do not want that just for me, for the work that I do, or for the work that Dr Mulholland does at UCLH; I want to encourage all the flowers to bloom, because somebody may actually hit on the progress we need. Even for an experienced clinical team with an established research base, the funding process is complex, fragmented and difficult to navigate. If it is challenging for clinical teams in major London teaching hospitals, I worry deeply about how many other clinical teams, without the same visibility or support, will simply fall away before a trial even has the chance to begin. Will the Minister consider how clearer, more navigable routes to accessing funding can be set out, and provide clearer direction, so that the money committed by the Government can reach the trials that patients so urgently need?

• 7 Jan 2026 · Advanced Brain Cancer: Tissue Freezing · Hansard source

  More

  My hon Friend is absolutely right. Let us be absolutely clear: there is no route for an improvement in any of the rare cancers unless there are more trials—and the system mitigates against that. There is a lot of talk at the moment about the Government of stakeholders. The stakeholders involved in drug trials—the major pharma companies and cancer charities—do not get involved in these trials because for pharma there is no money in it, and for the big charities, there seems to be more interest in primary science and mice work than there is in using some of these amazing drugs to find out whether they can provide some sort of support to people with rare cancers. It is the lack of treatment options, and this inaction, that led me, alongside my sister’s extraordinary network of friends and supporters, to launch our own trial in her memory. When the system does not move quickly enough, patients and families are forced to take matters into their own hands. We have an established clinical trial now under way at the University College London Hospitals clinical research facility with encouraging early indicators, a wider trial programme mapped out and further trials ready to follow with protocols written. We are seeking to clarify how to secure the funding needed to repeat and extend this work using alternative drugs, so that more patients can benefit. We continue to raise funds to support that goal.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Advanced Brain Cancer: Tissue Freezing · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Mr Western. I want to make a clarification. In my response to the intervention by the hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding), I mixed up quangos. I suggested that it was the fault of the MHRA that the Oncotherm machine was not in an NHS hospital. It is, of course, the fault of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. I would not want anybody to think that that machine has not been approved and registered by the MHRA.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Advanced Brain Cancer: Tissue Freezing · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman has been very kind to me in all these debates and has called me soft-hearted. If I am soft-hearted, that perhaps applies to both of us.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Advanced Brain Cancer: Tissue Freezing · Hansard source

  More

  I apologise for challenging the Minister’s assertion, but in the case of glioblastoma, it really does not matter how early it is detected; the consequence is the same. It is a stage 4 tumour that is going to kill the person and the average life expectancy is nine months.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Advanced Brain Cancer: Tissue Freezing · Hansard source

  More

  I completely agree with the hon. Member. Anything that we have raised—£1 million over two years—is a drop in the ocean. It is an important drop in the ocean, and it has led to action, which is what we need, but in the longer term, it has to be the Government and the pharmaceuticals that are not intervened on if we are to make progress.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Advanced Brain Cancer: Tissue Freezing · Hansard source

  More

  Debates on brain tumours are a bit like buses—there are none for ages, then they all come one after the other. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly (Chris Evans) for organising this debate—the second of two debates on this topic on consecutive days. I send my condolences to Ellie and her entire family on the death of Owain. I think, like a number of people in this room, I understand some of what she has experienced. I have to inform you, Mr Western, that a former Labour MP is close to dying of a glioblastoma—another politician after Tessa Jowell and my sister Margaret. I want to ask: when do we intervene to do something about this, rather than talk about it? I am supportive of any measure that genuinely improves patient outcomes for glioblastoma patients. Anything that increases survival of this devastating disease is worth supporting, but in my own experience, working closely with clinicians and supporting my late sister through her glioblastoma treatment, the most effective way to improve outcomes for patients with brain tumours is by accessing clinical drug trials. Without trials there is no route to better treatment or lifelines, and for too many patients, no pathway at all. I think we can all agree that the number of clinical trials under way for brain tumours is entirely inadequate. It is impossible to justify that, since 2018, the National Institute for Health and Care Research has invested just £13.7 million towards brain tumour research and none of the funding to date has supported using repurposed drugs—that is, using some of the immunotherapy drugs that are changing the face of the larger cancers and their outcomes.

• 6 Jan 2026 · Less Survivable Cancers · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones) for organising this debate. My purpose is to find a cure for glioblastoma brain tumours, the biggest cancer killer of children and adults under 40, with a life expectancy from diagnosis of just nine months and a five-year survival rate of 5%. The only way to find a cure and improve outcomes for a cancer that has seen no improvement in 30 years is through drug trials. In the absence of commercial or charitable glioblastoma drug trials, we launched our own trial in memory of my late sister, Margaret, in July last year. The trial is being run by Dr Paul Mulholland, Europe’s leading consultant on glioblastoma, who is based at University College London. It will include 16 newly diagnosed patients at University College hospital. This is a pre-surgery immunotherapy trial focused on patients who have received no prior treatment. The drug is given before surgery, allowing the immune system to attack the tumour before it is removed. I am delighted to confirm that we have already recruited five patients and, while the trial remains at an early stage, we are encouraged by the early findings. This is only the start. This journey has proven extraordinarily difficult and has been possible only because of an alignment of factors that very few will ever encounter: access to one of Europe’s leading clinicians working from a major London teaching hospital, alongside a world-class university; a group of my sister’s friends who have campaigned tirelessly and raised more than £1 million in two years; and the engagement and backing of the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to get the trial over the line. Our ambition is to establish 10 such trials using 10 different immunotherapy drugs, but ultimately our ability to raise money will end. How can Dr Mulholland apply for funding to support the programme of trials using repurposed immunotherapy drugs? Can the Minister’s team provide a written explanation and a link setting out how a bid can be made to the NIHR to access those funds? It is a straight question, and I would welcome a straight answer.

• 4 Dec 2025 · Acquired Brain Injury Action Plan · Hansard source

  More

  I ask that Members consider a four or five-minute time limit on their speeches so that everybody can be heard this afternoon, although I do not want to do that on a forced basis.

• 4 Dec 2025 · Acquired Brain Injury Action Plan · Hansard source

  More

  Flattery will get you nowhere.

• 4 Dec 2025 · Acquired Brain Injury Action Plan · Hansard source

  More

  I think that may be your modus operandi.

• 1 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome this Budget and the difference that it will make to families who have endured the cost of living crisis for far too long. I welcome the £150 cut to energy bills from April—a lifeline for households that have stretched every pound as far as it will go. I welcome the freeze on rail fares, because for many families even a small rise means a choice between essentials. I welcome the uplift in the national living wage and the minimum wage—a long-overdue recognition of the people whose work keeps our economy alive but who rarely see that reflected in their pay packets. These measures help. They are real, they are practical and they will be felt immediately in constituencies such as mine. However, every week in Mitcham and Morden I meet people who tell me the same thing: the only way they can manage the cost of living is by going back to cash—cash to budget, cash to separate the heating money from the food money, cash because a contactless tap can feel like losing control. Despite the fact that nearly one in five people now rely on cash to manage their household finances, access to cash and face-to-face banking facilities is becoming rarer for the people who need those things most. We are seeing an unprecedented number of bank branch closures. Lloyds Banking Group recently announced 136 closures between 2025 and 2026. That would have meant Mitcham losing its last bank this coming January. The closure sparked an access to cash review by Link—an assessment of our suitability for a banking hub. We met every criterion for a banking hub except one: the nearest full-service bank must be more than 15 minutes away by public transport. Mitcham has 115 shops and 48,000 people living near the high street, but the Transport for London timetable determined that we could not have a banking hub because it took only 14 minutes by bus to the nearest bank. What was there to do but galvanise the great people of my constituency into getting on the bus and recording it? Those recordings clearly showed that the bus took between 18 and 20 minutes to get to Tooting, so we have had those decisions reversed. Mitcham will get the first banking hub in south-west London and only the fifth in London. In the coming days, I will work with Cash Access UK to discuss the next steps for our new banking hub, and with the local community to ensure that the hub fits our needs. I raise all this to say to Members that the criteria for banking hubs, which I hear discussed all the time by Members of all parties, do not meet the needs of the suburban and urban areas that are losing their banks. The Government should reconsider the target of creating 350 new banking hubs in the next year. On behalf of all my colleagues, I ask for that number to grow, because people do not just need Budget measures; they need a way to manage their budgets through the use of cash.

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

  More

  When Lloyds closes in January, Mitcham will lose its last remaining bank, yet Link has refused a banking hub, claiming that the nearest branch in Tooting is just 14 minutes away. That figure comes from bus timetables, not real journeys by residents, many of whom have recorded it taking 20 minutes or longer. The whole dialogue risks becoming a dialogue of the death—a veil of respectability for decisions made in the interests of big banks, not the public. Will the Leader of the House find time for a debate on access to banking, so that common sense—not bus timetables—decides who gets a banking hub?

• 29 Oct 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  A fourth patient has entered the glioblastoma drug trial set up in memory of my late sister. Today, we are joined by Ben Trotman, a patient of a similar trial in 2022 that was funded by the Jon Moulton foundation. Since then, Ben has married Emily, and in March they welcomed beautiful baby Mabel. When will the National Institute for Health and Care Research spend the £40 million given in 2017 for trials on brain tumours, or will glioblastoma patients always have to rely on the grief stricken or the philanthropist for life and hope?

• 21 Oct 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  In the Secretary of State’s list of what has happened since his last oral questions, he failed to mention the appointment of our hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South West (Dr Ahmed) as a Minister. He is particularly looking at life sciences. Without life sciences and drug trials, we will not see an improvement in outcomes for rare cancers. Can the Secretary of State make a statement on what will be done about rare cancers?

• 11 Sept 2025 · Consumer Affairs · Hansard source

  More

  Not to mention Wagon Wheels.

• 11 Sept 2025 · Consumer Affairs · Hansard source

  More

  Order. I remind Members that they should bob if they wish to be called in the debate. I can see they are doing so, which is good.

• 11 Jul 2025 · Rare Cancers Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I do not want to detain the House too long. I just want to put on record my admiration for my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur) in guiding the Bill to this point and now hopefully forward—with a former Member of this House, Julie Elliott, now Baroness Elliott, in the House of Lords. When I met my hon. Friend to berate him about why he should take up this issue, I did not know about his father-in-law, but I have to say how proud his family must be of what he has done here. I mention that point because it is a motivator for all of us. When we understand the true desperation of facing these problems, it can often be the driver to make us work harder for achievement. I am delighted to say that 10 days ago, with the kindness of Mr Speaker, we launched the first glioblastoma drug trial in memory of my late sister. It will be run by Dr Paul Mulholland, who is, regrettably, too well known to many Members. He is Europe’s leading consultant on glioblastoma, based out of University College London, and the trial will include 16 patients at University College hospital who are newly diagnosed. They will have had no treatment and no surgery, and will be treated with immunotherapy. We are excited and delighted by the trial. It opened last Friday and Dr Mulholland met the first recruit last Monday. This could be the start of great things, but it is the start of a journey. It is a journey that is incomprehensibly difficult and requires a wonderful set of circumstances: Europe’s leading consultant at a big teaching hospital in London, next to a world-leading university; a group of my sister’s friends who campaigned tirelessly to raise funds, raising over £1 million in the last year—the trial will cost something in that order; and a Secretary of State for Health and Social Care who gave us excellent support and intervened to help us to get to the point of starting the trial. Those efforts are not available to everybody. We need to change things to get more trials. Without trials, there will be no progress, and I know from my own experience that there will be no progress, even with this brilliant Bill, unless we all, as Members, insist on progress and keep an eye on it. I am so thrilled that so many people, on the Labour Benches and in all parties across the House, are united in their commitment to see progress on glioblastoma. We want to see hope not only for glioblastoma victims but for the victims of all rare cancers. By starting with glioblastoma, we start with the worst. We will not cease our campaign until everybody has a fair chance of a cure.

• 11 Jul 2025 · Rare Cancers Bill · Hansard source

  More

  It is a matter of delight that the hon. Lady’s brother-in-law is still well and that the tumour has shrunk. But I should say to the House and all Members that that machine, which my late sister campaigned and raised funding for, is currently situated in a private hospital in London because it would get nowhere near an NHS hospital. That is the tragedy of the circumstances that we find ourselves in: our system is so restrictive that we cannot look for new innovations within our NHS.

• 11 Jul 2025 · Rare Cancers Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend agree that the Bill’s mechanism relating to orphan drugs is essential? Unless we can get the pharmaceutical industry to find it in its financial interest to start trials, we will not make any progress.

• 10 Jul 2025 · Children’s Health · Hansard source

  More

  When we talk about children’s health, we often think about the start of life—safe births, vaccinations and early years support—but we also need to talk about those children whose lives will be short, those with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions. Across the country, families caring for a seriously ill child face unimaginable challenges, yet too often the support they need simply is not there, especially at the end of life and especially at home. In my constituency, we are incredibly fortunate to be served by Shooting Star Children’s Hospices, which supports over 700 children and families across 14 boroughs and throughout Surrey. However, because the number of children needing that care in each individual borough is small, those children can easily be overlooked. That is the problem with a system built around commissioning at such a local level: when the numbers are low, the needs get lost. That is why the ringfenced central funding—formerly the children’s hospice grant—is so important. It supports hospices such as Shooting Star to provide respite, symptom management, bereavement support and end-of-life care, and helps give families choice at the hardest possible time. I welcome the Government’s decision to confirm £26 million for children’s hospices in NHS England’s funding for 2025-26, alongside £100 million in capital investment across all hospices. The truth is that the sector remains under real strain. According to Together for Short Lives, the leading voice for children’s palliative care, just 19% of ICBs formally commission 24/7 end-of-life care at home, and a third are still failing to meet even the basic national standards. I have three questions for the Minister: will the Government commit to maintaining and increasing the children’s hospice grant beyond 2025-26? Will they launch a proper review of how children’s palliative care is funded and planned, and will the Minister hold ICBs to greater account to ensure they meet their legal duty to commission that care and report transparently on progress? We are told that the 10-year NHS plan will bring care closer to home, but right now, there is no mention of children’s palliative care in that plan and no clarity on how those vital services will be funded. That has to change.