Tom Gordon MP: speeches

Speeches

• 17 Jun 2025 · Cancer Diagnoses · Hansard source

  More

  Every 17 minutes, someone in Yorkshire is told that they have cancer. Tomorrow, I will be launching a report for Yorkshire Cancer Research, which is based in my constituency, that will set out key recommendations. Will the Minister meet us to talk about how we can feed them into the national cancer plan?

• 17 Jun 2025 · Disabled People in Poverty · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is talking about barriers to disabled people, particularly those in poverty. I am running a campaign calling on the Government to make sure that people with disabled bus passes can use them at any time of the day, rather than just after 9.30 am. Does he agree that that would be a great way to alleviate the poverty of disabled people?

• 17 Jun 2025 · Prostate Cancer Treatment · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Lady for securing this important Adjournment debate. We have heard from a number of Members who have constituents who are affected or have frustrations with the current system. I met a gentleman called David in the run-up to the general election who has metastatic prostate cancer and is not eligible for abiraterone. He asked me if we would push and do what we could in Parliament to ensure that people such as him could get the drug. He is fortunate and can afford to pay for it privately, but not everyone is in that situation. This is about ensuring that we have equality of access for everyone, regardless of their financial circumstances. Does the hon. Lady agree that we need to have another look at this issue?

• 17 Jun 2025 · Genocide Convention: UK Compliance · Hansard source

  More

  Recently, the Joint Committee on Human Rights published a report about accountability for Daesh crimes, including genocide. A number of recommendations in that report pertain to issues applicable to other situations that have been referred to today. I want to press the Minister on the issue of universal jurisdiction. Would he and the Government consider a change in the law to allow for the prosecution of genocide regardless of a perpetrator’s nationality?

• 13 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to speak to amendment 3 in my name, which would do the exact opposite of the amendments of the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee)—in fact, it would see the commencement period reduced from four years to three years. As a member of the Bill Committee, when we had the initial conversation about increasing the commencement period from two years to four years, I was the only person to speak against it, and I pushed it to a vote. What frustrates me about the situation we are in is that, in effect, we are acknowledging that the reason we are here and debating this Bill is that the status quo is not acceptable. People are pushed to taking decisions that they should not be and having to go to foreign countries to have opportunities overseas. Those of us who support the Bill are broadly in agreement on those principles. A number of things frustrate me about the four-year period, principally that the people in office—the Government of the day—will not necessarily be here to implement it. I am really hesitant about supporting a Bill when we do not know who would see through those details. Amendment 3 would reduce the threshold back down to three years, which would still be more than most jurisdictions around the world. Countries have implemented assisted dying legislation after as short a time as six months, 12 months or 18 months, so three years would still be a substantial increase compared with other countries. We are not innovators or leaders in this field: there is no reason why we cannot take best practice and learn from and speak to colleagues around the world. I believe that this Bill has the strongest safeguards of any, which is why I think an implementation period of three years would more than meet the requirements.

• 13 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  One of the key things that the Bill’s sponsor, the hon. Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater), has said throughout is that four years, in the Bill as it currently is, would be a backstop. Can that be the case if the Minister is talking about a requirement of four years and that it could not have been delivered sooner?

• 12 Jun 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  This weekend, with the team from my parliamentary office, I will be taking part in the Knaresborough bed race, a fantastic local community event, to raise money for Knaresborough Town AFC. Will the Leader of the House congratulate in advance all those who take part and hopefully finish, as well as the organisers of the event, and will she consider a debate in Government time on unique and culturally important sporting events?

• 12 Jun 2025 · Spending Review: Health and Social Care · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the funding announced to repair hospitals with RAAC, which will hopefully include Harrogate district hospital in my constituency. It has already received some money to remove RAAC in one building, which has since been demolished, but it still has a £15 million business case waiting with the Department of Health and Social Care for the next round of RAAC repairs. Will the Minister set out a timetable for repairs to hospitals such as Harrogate’s and for when we should expect to know if we will receive some of that funding?

• 12 Jun 2025 · Long-term Medical Conditions · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to intervene on the hon. Gentleman. I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for diabetes and I want to emphasise the point about early detection. A family recently got in touch with me who tragically lost their daughter because she had not been identified as a type 1 diabetic and ended up in diabetic ketoacidosis. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we need to do more to identify people and screen them for chronic, lifelong conditions?

• 10 Jun 2025 · Mass Transit: West Yorkshire · Hansard source

  More

  I commend the hon. Gentleman for his campaigning on that issue, but I return to the point that we need a comprehensive integrated transport network that links up everything. What we have seen previously is a piecemeal approach that has not necessarily thought through how we would go about something like this. While it is welcome that it is on the way to being resolved, it is a damning indictment of the situation up until now. The funding announced is exactly the same as that announced under the previous Conservative Government —to the penny, so I question whether it is new funding or just a repackaging and reallocation of existing funding. I am sure the Conservative spokesperson, the hon. Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew), will pick up on that point; he almost certainly will. Turning to the work of the combined authority and the West Yorkshire Mayor: back when I was a councillor in Wakefield, we voted on the agreement to enter that authority. In that consultation, the only local authority in West Yorkshire that did not want to enter a combined authority or have a regional mayor was Wakefield, principally because it had previously been asked if it wanted a mayor and had voted against it. There were also concerns about powers being sucked up from local authorities to a new combined authority. Speaking to local councillors across the piece, there is still scepticism about whether that is happening or whether the resulting transport decisions have been in the interests of everyone in all corners of West Yorkshire. The new mayor promised to fix the buses in her first term and she ran her re-election campaign based on that, so I think there are questions to be answered there. When we look further afield, we have issues with rail links out of Leeds into other places across county boundaries, such as Harrogate and Knaresborough, with that link between Harrogate and York. While it is welcome that funding has been announced for West Yorkshire, we did not get a single penny for North Yorkshire under the Labour mayor, David Skaith. Rounding up in the interests of time, we want to see a properly integrated transport plan with proper funding—a Transport for Yorkshire approach to make sure that no one is left behind.

• 10 Jun 2025 · Mass Transit: West Yorkshire · Hansard source

  More

  On that point, I had an interesting interaction with the Secretary of State for Transport. I asked her about the reallocation of that HS2 money, and she referred to it as “fantasy money”. What does the hon. Gentleman say to the point that it is a reallocation of money that the Secretary of State says did not exist?

• 10 Jun 2025 · Mass Transit: West Yorkshire · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

• 10 Jun 2025 · Mass Transit: West Yorkshire · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. I congratulate the hon. Member for Leeds South West and Morley (Mark Sewards) on securing this debate on such an important topic. The recent announcement of local transport investment marks a significant milestone for West Yorkshire—particularly the long-awaited mass transit system, which will finally bring trams back to the region. The Liberal Democrats have long campaigned for a mass transit network across Leeds and West Yorkshire; as the hon. Gentleman pointed out, Leeds is the largest city in western Europe without one, so the funding is very welcome. Transport challenges do not stop at city boundaries, however. People’s lives span towns, villages and rural areas, and so must the solutions. We need a truly Yorkshire-wide approach that encourages cross-boundary collaboration, unlocks regional growth and serves all communities, not just urban cores. In that spirit, I want to focus on the fantastic work of Liberal Democrat councillors across West Yorkshire, who have been campaigning tirelessly on public transport issues over a number of years. To wind the clock back a bit, I was at one point a West Yorkshire Liberal Democrat councillor. Interestingly, at that point in time, my council ward was wrapped around on three sides by North Yorkshire. I was raised in West Yorkshire, but educated at Selby college, so I know all too well the issues with cross-boundary transit. Therefore, while the Liberal Democrats and I welcome this new funding, a proper Yorkshire-wide approach is key to ensuring that infrastructure does not end at those arbitrary lines. Let us look around West Yorkshire: councillors on the ground in Bradford, including Jeanette Sunderland, have been campaigning for over a decade to improve bus connections to Apperley Bridge rail station—a vital link that is still missing for over 15,000 homes. Without it, many are cut off from easy rail access, limiting opportunities for work and education. Councillor Brendan Stubbs has rightly been calling for urgent action to secure funding for a new Bradford bus station. The current station, as we know, is crumbling and unsafe, and new facilities must integrate effectively with the proposed tram network to serve Bradford’s future needs. In Kirklees, local councillors John Lawson and Baroness Pinnock have raised concerns about the Dewsbury-Cleckheaton bus lane proposals. Objections are focused mainly on safety risks, disruption from construction and potential congestion. Many argue that simpler, lower-cost measures, such as improved traffic light control and enhanced bus reliability, would provide better value for money and cause less disruption. Turning to the White Rose shopping centre that the hon. Member for Leeds South West and Morley mentioned, I think it is good that announcements have been made for phase 1. My concern is that the work on the train station there was already under way, but it was paused after it went over budget of the £26 million originally anticipated. If we are being honest, there has been a bit of a face-saving exercise put on by the combined authority.

• 10 Jun 2025 · Nuclear Power: Investment · Hansard source

  More

  Happy birthday, Mr Speaker. I would like to ask the Secretary of State what guarantees are in place to ensure that these jobs go to local people rather than to overseas contractors? Also, what investment in training and skills will be provided to make sure that they go to local people on the ground?

• 20 May 2025 · Adoption and Kinship Placements · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) for allowing me to intervene first. In the Adjournment debate that I held on this subject, the Minister responded, “support for adopted children is critical. It can decrease the likelihood of adoption disruptions or breakdowns.” —[ Official Report , 3 April 2025; Vol. 765, c. 555.] In real terms to people on the ground, this is a cut, so will she acknowledge that the actions of her Government will have an impact on adoption breakdown and disruption?

• 20 May 2025 · Adoption and Kinship Placements · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I will make progress. Let me speak to the reality of my amendment with a story from a constituent who does not wish to be named. She wrote to me about her brother, who died at age 58 from MND. Prior to his diagnosis, he was strong, healthy and, as she put it, a lot of fun. He was a great family man, but it was dreadful to watch his illness progress, and it had a profound impact on the family. It took 18 months of effort, worry and deep distress before he finally passed away. He wanted to have control over the time of his death, knowing what was to come. My constituent wrote: “A difficult subject for most of us to contemplate, but in his particular case the possibility of assisted dying would have given him much comfort.”

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am bringing my remarks to a close. If we believe in dignity, let us ensure it is a dignity that includes everyone; if we believe in autonomy, let us not deny it to those who may lose their voice tomorrow; and if we believe in compassion, let it be a compassion that recognises the lived reality of all terminal illnesses and does not consign those with MND to the status quo.

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I will make some progress. The amendment is not about eroding the careful work that the Bill Committee has done to expand the rigorous safeguards already in the Bill; it is about ensuring that some people with the cruellest terminal conditions are not left out of the options that we are seeking to give others.

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention. It was really interesting how the debate was conducted on Second Reading and in Committee, and how we were meant to be having that respectful debate, and it is disappointing to hear comments from opponents already. Amendment 4 seeks a simple yet crucial change to extend the eligibility period for those with neurodegenerative conditions, from six months to 12 months, something that is already reflected in legislation in five of six Australian states. My amendment mirrors the wording used in that legislation, and it is based not on conjecture but on medical reality, international precedent and, most importantly, the lived experiences of those facing some of the most harrowing diseases imaginable. Amendment 4 would not expand the Bill’s reach beyond terminal conditions; it simply acknowledges that for people with conditions such as MND and other neurodegenerative diseases, the current six-month prognosis requirement creates a cruel and unnecessary barrier.

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Member makes a pertinent point about other jurisdictions and the different Bills and conversations around them that they have. I tabled my amendment in order to ensure that we have that debate in this place. I extend my condolences to the family. These are progressive, irreversible diseases; their trajectory is well understood; and their toll is devastating. People with MND, for instance, often face a relentless loss of muscle function, leaving them unable to move, speak or even swallow. Before they reach the six-month prognosis threshold, they may already be enduring intolerable suffering. Crucially, many will lose the capacity necessary to make an application before they ever qualify. The Bill already contains the most robust protections of any assisted dying Bill in the world, with mandatory capacity assessments, a multi-step approval process and a clear requirement for terminal illness. We have gone further than any other jurisdiction in terms of safeguards.

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I start by thanking the hon. Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater) for introducing the Bill and for giving me the opportunity to serve on the Bill Committee. I rise to speak in favour of my amendment 4, which goes to the very heart of what the Bill is all about: dignity, compassion and choice at the end of life.

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for that powerful and compelling intervention. We risk creating a two-tier system. We say that we want to fix the status quo because we know that it is not working, but if the Bill forces people such as my constituent’s brother to consider dying earlier—or worse, to have to travel abroad for an assisted death in another far-off, distant country under different laws—then have we really changed anything? We may be telling people with cancer that they can access a dignified death under the Bill, but also telling those with neurodegenerative conditions such as MND that they must either endure prolonged suffering or act prematurely, just to stay ahead of a ticking clock. That is not justice, in my view, and it is certainly not compassion. International experience backs up the amendment. In Victoria, where a 12-month limit applies to neurodegenerative conditions, only 7% of applicants lose capacity before they can proceed. In New Zealand, where the six-month threshold remains, many people are excluded because they lose that ability too soon. We know that MND takes more than 2,000 lives a year in the UK alone—six people every single day. I ask colleagues not to turn away from those people; not to dismiss their fears, their hopes or their pleas for fairness.

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. The amendment is designed to stop our having a conversation about eligibility after this Bill. I want to see a Bill that stops the argument about a slippery slope and gives equitable access to people with all health conditions.

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I will make a little progress, as I was in the middle of a quotation. It continues: “Unless you are actually affected by something as desperate as MND, you cannot understand what it really means to have such an option.” My constituent is right. We can debate legal safeguards, ethics and precedents all day in this Chamber, but for those who are living with devastating diseases, this is not theoretical; it is personal, it is urgent and it is real.