Beccy Cooper MP: speeches

Speeches

• 20 Apr 2026 · Maternity Commissioner · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure, Ms Jardine—it is not Sir Alec any more—to serve under your chairship. I want to speak in the debate as a member of the Health and Social Care Committee and as the Member of Parliament for Worthing West. At a local level, University Hospitals Sussex NHS foundation trust has implemented huge improvements, following the raising of the alarm about the safety of our maternity services after a number of heartbreaking, avoidable baby deaths came to light. For the families affected, life will never be the same again. There will now be a review, led by Donna Ockenden, to make sure that the truth of those times is fully heard and understood, that the indescribable experience of those families is documented to best effect and that the lessons are embedded in future practice. The review will also contribute to improvements that are already making a difference in maternity services at University Hospitals Sussex, including at my own hospital in Worthing. In a recent CQC inspection, maternity services were rated as good. That reflects the maternity survey, in which 98% of women said they felt they had been treated with dignity and respect during labour and birth, and 95% felt involved enough in decisions about their care. We have heard from many colleagues this afternoon about the many times when that has not happened, so I take great hope from the fact that the survey is so positive. Improvements in those maternity services have included 24/7 birth supporters working with experts by experience to create a restorative culture, bespoke antenatal pathways for asylum seekers and refugees, and specialist midwifery support for Traveller communities. There is strengthened staffing capacity, with 40 additional qualified midwives recruited across the trust’s maternity units, which are now fully staffed, compared with a 15% vacancy rate at the time of the previous inspection. What a difference that has made. That level of service improvement and delivery needs to be a requisite for all maternity services in this country. The soon to be published Amos review recommendations, which we have heard about this afternoon, will undoubtedly provide a clear blueprint for the national maternity and neonatal taskforce to move things forward. But let us be in no doubt: as has been said, we have had 700 recommendations to date, and we probably know what will be in the Amos review, so let it be the last one. The tragic fact, despite the excellent improvements I have seen in my local area, is that between 2022 and 2024 the overall rate of maternal death in the UK was 20% higher than it was from 2009 to 2011, when the Government of the day set an ambition to halve the rate of maternal mortality in England. Although the life of a precious baby is priceless, clinical negligence does have a price tag. The NHS has faced an estimated £27.4 billion bill for maternity negligence in England since 2019. That figure exceeds the total maternity budget for the same period, and reflects the devastating toll of preventable deaths and life-altering injuries to mothers and babies. There has been significant investment in increasing the number of midwives over the past 18 months under this Labour Government, with an extra 800 midwives recruited since December 2024, but that is not enough on its own. As we have heard so sensibly from my colleagues, there needs to be widespread system change and a continuum of care. We heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Clapham and Brixton Hill (Bell Ribeiro-Addy) about the issues around black maternal health. The Health and Social Care Committee highlighted those issues in its inquiry, when we saw that black women in England continue to face disproportionately poor outcomes in maternity care and the highest maternal mortality rates. Babies born to black women are more than twice as likely to die in their first year, compared with babies born to white women—a fact that I find incredible in this day and age, as somebody who has worked in the NHS as a doctor and who is now a public health consultant. It is entirely unacceptable that that continues to be the case. The task, therefore, is accountability and co-ordination, and ensuring that evidence-based recommendations drive rapid improvement for women, their babies and hard-working staff. The women’s health strategy, published last week, recognises that women’s birth experiences and outcomes are a fundamental aspect of high-quality healthcare. Maternity services need to be embedded in a model that is based on relationships and wider care. That is essentially what health services live or die on: if we do not have good relationships and good wider care, our health services will struggle. How we organise our services also needs to change, and that is a core mission of our Government in shifting to community-based care and a neighbourhood health model. Some £200 million has been invested in the healthy babies programme to improve perinatal mental health, parent-infant relationships and infant feeding in 75 local authorities. That is part of the £900 million that has been allocated to Best Start family hubs. The best start in life campaign includes information on pregnancy, but we must ensure that maternity healthcare is fully embedded in the shift to neighbourhood care. Members should be in no doubt: we have talked about moving from hospital to community throughout the 20 years that I have been in public health and medicine, and we have yet to do it. So I am under no illusions that this is incredibly difficult, but the focus we have this time is welcome. Considering the improvements that have been made in my own area by University Hospitals Sussex; the significant steps being taken by the Government in establishing the taskforce led by the Secretary of State; and the investment in midwives and, more broadly, in women’s health and community-based care, I think that positive action is starting to take hold. Following the publication of the Amos review, the Minister may want to consider the possibility of a maternity commissioner to carry out the work of the taskforce, but the primary driver of that decision must be the aim of embedding the progress that is being made now, and sustainably embedding across maternity services a safe, holistic, person-centred approach that can endure and adapt for many generations to come.

• 14 Apr 2026 · NHS Management · Hansard source

  More

  Effective NHS management lives or dies on the ability of our integrated care boards to address population health needs. As the devolution Bill moves forward and at pace in areas such as mine in Sussex, it brings with it more opportunity for working strategically across sectors such as health and local government. What steps is the Minister taking to strengthen population health management in our integrated care boards?

• 25 Mar 2026 · Public Baths and Lidos · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Efford. I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough (Andrew Pakes) for his continued advocacy. As someone who lived down the road in Huntingdon for many years, I am delighted to hear that Peterborough lido is up and running again, which is fantastic. Lidos are not just leisure facilities; they are part of the fabric of our communities, as other hon. Members have so eloquently spoken about already. In Worthing West, as my hon. Friend the Member for East Worthing and Shoreham (Tom Rutland) has already alluded to, our lido tells a similar story. It was originally built as a bandstand in 1925, and was later transformed into a pool. It has long been a defining feature of our seafront, and it is a place to which people feel deeply connected. For some time, it has stood empty. However, it has not been redundant, as it has played host to a fantastic series of film backdrops. The 2018 Laurel and Hardy biopic was set in our wonderful lido, and it can also be seen in “Wicked Little Letters” with Olivia Colman. Even though we welcome our lido being a film backdrop, it is now changing into something much more proactive for our community, as there is real momentum behind bringing it back to life. It has been a local priority for me and my hon. Friend the Member for East Worthing and Shoreham, and we have been working with partners, including Worthing borough council, Worthing Heritage, businesses and community groups, to help drive that forward.

• 25 Mar 2026 · Public Baths and Lidos · Hansard source

  More

  Excellent. I thank my hon. Friend, who has nicely paid tribute to them. Well done. What has been so striking about the work we are doing is the level of local energy in our community. People care deeply about these spaces, and they want to see them thriving again. We have an opportunity to do that in a way that reflects who we are now as a town, by creating a space that works for the future—one that can bring people together and host community life, and that makes the most of its unique position on the seafront. In Worthing, the sea is not just a backdrop. It is part of our identity, which gives us the chance to think a little differently about how people experience this space and the role it can play in everyday life. At this point, I give credit to my hon. Friend the Member for East Worthing and Shoreham. The lido is right on the seafront, and being on the channel, as Members can imagine, the structure is not terribly stable. Worthing borough council is putting in a lot of money, and Historic England is looking to shore it up so that it does not fall into the sea. Although I am not an engineer, the prospect of putting a swimming pool back into that structure looks quite unlikely. My mighty hon. Friend is undeterred. He says that we must have some sort of sea pool, so we are looking into the possibility of having a sea pool near the lido structure. We are also looking at the possibility of green energy generation. What started out as a community project is blossoming into something quite fantastic for Worthing. It is in its early days, but we are very excited. As a public health doctor, I can see real value in these spaces, and many Members have mentioned public health already. Access to healthy outdoor spaces should not be a luxury; everyone should benefit from them, regardless of where they live or what their circumstances are. I conclude by inviting all hon. Members to come to Worthing to see the lido in its current art deco glory, and I ask the Minister to consider the options for Government contributions to our lido. There will be mighty funding contributions, and I ask the Government to contribute in whatever way possible to our community “ DIY SOS” project.

• 24 Feb 2026 · National Wellbeing Indicators · Hansard source

  More

  It is great to hear that wellbeing is being built in through the shift to prevention in our national health strategy. Does the Minister agree that we should now champion health in all policies, starting with the mandatory use of the wellbeing indicators available for the Treasury Green Book, which are currently used sporadically at best?

• 24 Feb 2026 · National Wellbeing Indicators · Hansard source

  More

  12. What assessment he has made of the potential implications for his polices of recent trends in national wellbeing indicators.

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

  More

  As always, it is an honour and a privilege to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley), who is a retired ear, nose and throat surgeon. It has been a pleasure to listen to my colleagues in the House debating this Bill. In common with Members from across the House, I absolutely welcome the Bill, and I am glad to see it come forward. I have heard from many of my junior medic colleagues about the issues that my hon. Friend set out so eloquently, and we need to care for our UK graduate workforce. In recent years, NHS workforce planning has not been done well. There has been an increase in the number of medical students training, which we welcome, but there has not been a commensurate increase in the number of jobs available at the end of that training, which makes no sense. Training is expensive, and UK graduates should be able to access employment at the end of their training. As many Members from across the House have said, there must be recognition that healthcare professionals are part of a global workforce. There will continue to be a natural flow of my medical colleagues heading to other parts of the world to deploy their skills, and there will continue to be a global workforce in our national health service. We should not underestimate the mutual learning that results from this arrangement. I am chair of the all-party parliamentary group on global health and security. We are undertaking an inquiry with our Global Health Partnerships colleagues on the net benefits to the UK from international recruitment, and at the future reciprocal benefits for both the UK and countries of heritage. The benefits will go both ways; we should not underestimate that. A balance needs to be found, and I think this legislation more than achieves that. We are prioritising UK graduates, increasing the number of placements available, and continuing to recognise international skilled personnel who already have experience of the UK health service, whom we value and do not want to lose. This will of course need close monitoring, alongside implementation of the NHS workforce plan. All that has been said, but I just wanted to reinforce it. What has not been mentioned in the Chamber this afternoon, and I would like to bring it to the Minister’s attention, is the public health workforce. As a declaration of interest, I am still a public health consultant or specialist on the General Medical Council register. The public health workforce is exempt from the prioritisation in this Bill, because we are very fortunate that public health benefits not only from medical graduates such as myself, but from a non-medical workforce. There are benefits from this mix, and the global nature of public health is reflected in having an international mix, but public health training is hugely oversubscribed in the United Kingdom. So will the Minister give further consideration to this exemption to ensure that UK graduates do not continue to face the issues, which have been so eloquently outlined, currently faced by their medical colleagues?

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

  More

  It is with concern that I raise the issue of FIFA deepening its commercial ties to the betting industry by letting gambling operators livestream world cup games this year. Will the Leader of the House ask the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and Health Ministers to review this matter urgently, given that severe gambling harms directly affect at least 1.5 million adults across the UK?

• 22 Jan 2026 · Local Government Reorganisation · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. As a former leader of Worthing borough council, I pay tribute to my councillor colleagues, who did not come to the decision they have made lightly. They were informed by the officers, and they have had 15 years of underfunding on the south coast. Pockets of deprivation in coastal towns have long been ignored, and I very much welcome the fairer funding formula, which now recognises that. As we are on the fast track in Sussex, could the Secretary of State please reassure us that unitary authority decisions will be announced as soon as possible, and that the boundary commission will make sure we have the right sized wards for our new unitary authorities at the earliest possible opportunity?

• 19 Jan 2026 · Flu Vaccination: School Absences · Hansard source

  More

  As flu circulation in children normally starts before adults, and protection through the vaccine lasts much longer in children, the children’s programme should be under way across schools as early as possible from September 1. In my constituency of Worthing West, some schools were vaccinating children in the final weeks before Christmas last year. Will the Minister therefore undertake to work with the Department of Health and Social Care to review the timeliness of flu vaccinations in all schools, and to ensure that they are given as early as possible in the upcoming 2026-27 winter season?

• 19 Jan 2026 · Flu Vaccination: School Absences · Hansard source

  More

  8. What assessment she has made of the potential impact of flu vaccination levels on rates of school absence in autumn 2025.

• 6 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  My hometown of Worthing is already delivering a major heat network, but it is not yet designated as a heat network zone. Could the Minister please consider making this designation at the earliest possible opportunity, and ensuring that grid capacity supports early designation for advanced schemes?

• 5 Jan 2026 · Length of the School Week · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to speak in this debate. I have to declare an interest: my children asked me to do so. I think one of them actually signed the petition; I am not sure what the age limit is, but he is certainly very interested in the debate. I will leave the education questions to my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson), who has just spoken so eloquently, and to other people who know so much about education. My background is in health, so I come at the debate from that point of view, and I absolutely hear and reiterate the points about mental health conditions for young people, particularly post pandemic. That is a serious issue, and I know that the schools in my constituency have serious concerns about absenteeism and providing the best support that they can for pupils. In terms of health issues, I want to draw some parallels with research that has been done on a four-day working week. My hon. Friend mentioned that if we did go to a four-day school week, that would obviously have implications for parents, who would need to be able to ensure that their children were safe and cared for on the fifth day. Some good research has been done on four-day working weeks, and it showed—this is within my remit—that in companies that offered one, there was a significant improvement in mental and physical health for workers. The before-and-after data shows that 39% of employees were less stressed and 71% had reduced levels of burnout at the end of the trial, which is very significant and a serious consideration given what we have heard about the enormous number of teachers who are leaving with burnout. Of the 61 companies participating in the research, 56—that is 92%—are continuing with the four-day week, with 18 confirming that the policy is a permanent change. I wonder whether this debate, specific as it is to a four-day week for schools, is part of a wider consideration, and perhaps a wider cultural change, as to how we reorientate the work-life balance, which I think most of us would say is not optimal for a good number of people in this country and perhaps globally. I would like the Minister to consider a couple of things and I am sure he will. The petition says that the teaching time per week would stay the same. I know that there has already been a conversation with my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield about the curriculum’s shape and size and the exam stresses that our children face. Again, I will leave that to people who know much more about education, but does this need to be the case? If the teaching time remained the same on the four days and, as has been said, the fifth day was for teachers to plan, would we be able to right-size and right-shape the curriculum to allow our children to be ready, post 18, to do whatever they wanted to in this world? I do not know the answer, and I would be interested to hear others’ thoughts. This question has also been talked about: if we did move to a four-day week, should that be for all ages? I am a mum of two children who are now in high school, having been through pre-school and primary school. Pre-school—nursery—was mornings. There was no way my two little boys would have been able to cope for longer than that in pre-school. Similarly, having watched them coming out of primary school, I think a longer day there would have been a lot to deal with. But as they get older, I take the point about starting later—getting my 14-year-old out of bed is increasingly difficult. Is a longer day more viable for older children than for younger children? Should this be looked at more flexibly? I understand that in some schools around the country it is already happening—not just a four-day working week, but perhaps four and a half days or a nine-day fortnight. I understand that the Government have good reasons for not planning to introduce such a policy right now, but I do think this is part of a broader conversation. I welcome young people coming into the conversation and I look forward to the conversation continuing.

• 8 Dec 2025 · Draft International Development Association (Twenty-First Replenishment) Order 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Western. I rise to put on record my support for this delegated legislation, and to make three very quick points. It is not always easy to make the argument for global investment in this time and age, but this is an excellent example of how we can really add to global investment and see a real return for taxpayers. As the Minister alluded to, each $1 invested will generate more than $4 for programming in IDA-specific countries. That is a fantastic return on investment. As the shadow Minister said, IDA21 will work alongside the World Bank Group’s evolution. We are always looking at the global architecture to make sure that governance is sufficient. The bank is talking about an improved scorecard, looking at performance and looking seriously at quantitative data as well as qualitative results. It is really important when we look at development, and at populations’ wellbeing, that we look at quantitative and qualitative data. Finally, there are obviously discussions around borders at the moment, but climate change is affecting us all. If we do not mitigate the worst effects of climate change, it will push 130 million more people into poverty by 2030. We are part of that global world and must address that. Similarly, in my own world of global health, infectious diseases do not respect borders. By investing in global infrastructure and global development, we are protecting our own borders and security, as well as global health.

• 3 Dec 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q2. Gambling addiction is a serious public health harm, causing ill health and misery for millions of people in this country. The industry now spends £2 billion a year on advertising, often targeting vulnerable people and exposing our children to harm. Like many Members across the House, I very much welcome the Chancellor’s announcement last week to tax harmful online gambling products. Does the Prime Minister agree that to continue this essential work, we must now act to tackle harmful gambling advertising to protect the health of our children?

• 2 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T9. We know that our official development assistance budget is currently reduced to allow for defence investment, but given the continuing need to improve global health, not least to guarantee our own health and security, will the Minister meet me and other concerned colleagues to discuss how best to continue to protect lifesaving health programmes and the work with women and girls that she has rightly prioritised?

• 2 Dec 2025 · Gambling: Regulatory Reform · Hansard source

  More

  Those are points very well made. Tackling gambling harms should be at the top of our public health priorities—I make a declaration of interest: I am a public health consultant—to ensure our country thrives economically as well as in health terms. The two are intertwined; we cannot separate them. Gambling profit cannot be separated from the harm inflicted. In online gambling, 86% of profits come from the top 5% of customers. We have already heard from the hon. Member for Witney and others about the ubiquity of advertising. A recent report showed that the industry spends £2 billion a year on advertising—an astronomical sum that is fuelling a public health crisis in this country. Targeted digital marketing means that someone with a gambling problem is nine times more likely to be offered a so-called free bet, according to the Gambling Commission. We need regulatory and legislative tools to tackle industry marketing practices, and we must make sure that children are protected from the proliferation of gambling ads, sponsorship and influencer marketing. As someone who has teenage children, I am only too aware that responsible mobile phone usage only goes so far; we must ensure that our children are protected from this insidious way of introducing people to gambling far too early and far too often. Gambling Commission statistics show that 1.2% of children experience problem gambling, and 3.4% of 11 to 17-year-olds are already being harmed by their gambling. That is astonishing and outrageous. Children should receive independent education about the dangers of gambling, and we must stop incentivising them to gamble through widespread advertising, both online and offline. We cannot treat gambling as a harmless leisure activity when 14% of British adults are at risk of gambling harm and gambling-related suicides occur in their hundreds every year. Gambling is a matter of public health. I appreciate that it is overseen by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, but I think it should be overseen by the Department of Health and Social Care, with a legislative framework that is fit for purpose for the digital age. We have heard about the last Government’s White Paper, which does not give us the right road map to address this public health crisis; it does not address the fact that councils have no adequate powers to prevent adult gaming centres from proliferating locally, sucking the life out of our more deprived communities, and it fails to address advertising, sponsorship and the modern marketing of gambling. We must look to review the White Paper and set a timeline for a new gambling Act.

• 2 Dec 2025 · Gambling: Regulatory Reform · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. I thank the hon. Member for Witney (Charlie Maynard) for securing this timely debate. It is interesting to hear different Members from across the House taking a stand on this issue. I listened with interest to my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell), who has bet365 in his constituency; he spoke about his need to make sure his residents have good jobs, but also about how to balance those harms. It is interesting to hear how we can move forward with that. I welcome the Government’s Budget announcements increasing remote gaming duty and general betting duty as a way to tackle some of our more harmful forms of gambling, particularly in online gaming. That is something that the all-party parliamentary group on gambling reform and many Members across this House have championed—it is a cross-party issue. This move from the Chancellor goes some way towards addressing the many billions of pounds that gambling harm costs the public purse. The Office for Health Improvement and Disparities estimates that the public health costs of gambling in England alone are between £1 billion and £1.77 billion, but that figure captures only a subset of costs: it relies on self-reporting and the methodology does not include costs including secondary mental health services, alcohol and drug use, lost tax from employment and the cost of lives lost to gambling suicide. Furthermore, the cost of gambling goes far beyond the individual themselves. For every person experiencing problem gambling, it is estimated that up to six others are affected—their families, children, employers and community members.

• 2 Dec 2025 · Gambling: Regulatory Reform · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. Gambling has become ubiquitous in our society. It is endemic. We watch the television; we have online roulette in our pockets—it is everywhere. We must also be mindful of the black market as well as the legal gambling companies, and go after both with ferocity to make sure the harms are reduced. Having established the need to recognise the public health costs of the most dangerous gambling products, we should review the taxation of other harmful forms of gambling, particularly the most dangerous category—the B3 machines in adult gaming centres. It is right that the duty paid by those machines is set at a higher rate. The Gambling Commission, which we have already heard about, must do more to ensure that licence conditions are followed by adult gaming centres. There are widespread reports of breaches of the rules, notably the 80/20 rule relating to the most harmful category of machine, and games that facilitate much higher stakes than is permitted in the licensing codes. Let us be clear; gambling is highly profitable, and that profit cannot be separated from the harm inflicted. We have already heard this, but it is worth stating again: 60% of the industry’s profits come from 5% of customers who are either addicted or at risk.

• 25 Nov 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I very much welcome this devolution Bill, and today I speak in support of Government new clause 45 and amendments 153 and 107 proposed by my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Dr Opher). New clause 45 and amendment 153 relate to the essential role of our local councillors. As a recent councillor and leader of Worthing borough council, I can attest to how hard my fellow councillors work for very little remuneration—contrary to public perception—and how much they contribute to the health and wellbeing of our local communities. As my hon. Friend the Member for North West Cambridgeshire (Sam Carling) alluded to, as the temperature has risen in politics in recent years, these local residents who have put themselves forward with the aim of contributing positively to their communities have increasingly found themselves the target of online and in-person abuse. While it is no more acceptable for them than it is for us in national politics, we must do all we can to ensure that they and their families are safe. It is therefore good to see that recognised in new clause 45 proposing that council members’ home addresses will no longer appear in published registers of interests. Amendment 153 acknowledges the different forms of council structure, and there has already been some debate on this matter today. My constituency of Worthing West houses two councils—Worthing borough council is a leader and cabinet system; Arun district council is a committee system. Again, as a former council leader, my preference and experience tells me that the leader and cabinet system is highly effective, but I acknowledge that the committee system can potentially allow greater involvement in decision making across the councillor groupings. With that in mind, I am supportive of the intent stated in amendment 153 that if the local authority’s committee system is protected, a review should be undertaken to see whether it is in the best interests of that local authority to move to the leader and cabinet system. For my constituency, which is also undergoing local government reform alongside moving to a devolution model, our councillors in Worthing and Arun will need to consider the best option for the area as part of our new unitary authority when these footprints are agreed. Amendment 107 asks that environmental interests be considered as criteria for community right to buy, provided that the land is not allocated in the local development plan. It is positive to hear already from the Minister today about the protections for local sports grounds. The environmental wellbeing of local communities, alongside economic and social benefits, is an area close to my heart as a public health consultant living on the south coast. Worthing has the smallest amount of green land per head of population in the UK—less than a snooker table per person. We have limited green land left in our constituency’s urban areas, and even though we are undoubtedly blessed with the English channel to the south and the south downs to the north, people do not live in the sea and very few of us live in our national park. Our wellbeing is therefore determined by our densely populated urban strip bordering the coastline. Our remaining green spaces in this area are incredibly precious for our mental and physical health, air quality and climate mitigation measures. Green spaces can help to reduce our ever-increasing flood risk. I therefore would welcome any additional guidance from the Minister in this area for our current and soon-to-be devolved regions, such as my own in Sussex. The health of our population should be our No. 1 priority, and devolved government is ideally placed to help deliver those much-needed protections and improvements for our communities.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Parkinson’s Disease · Hansard source

  More

  It is incredibly timely that we are talking about this issue in the context of the NHS 10-year strategy, which will provide a shift from treatment to prevention. A lot can be done in the preventive space for those with Parkinson’s, as with so many other neurological disorders. I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention; I can slow down slightly now. The Parky charter asks for speedy specialists, instant information on day one, a cross-condition health conditions passport, comprehensive multidisciplinary care close to home, and a sustained quest for a cure. Alongside that, I ask the Minister to consider a near-term date to deliver 18-week neurology referrals for suspected Parkinson’s; to ensure annual specialist reviews for people with diagnosed Parkinson’s; to expand specialist nurse and multidisciplinary team posts in each area of the country—no more postcode lottery; to pilot the cross-condition health conditions passport, although I appreciate that there are links there to the upcoming NHS App work; to publish access standards and dashboards —

• 17 Nov 2025 · Parkinson’s Disease · Hansard source

  More

  It is a privilege to speak for Worthing West, where support for the Parky petition has been strong, particularly in our amazing local Parkinson’s group. Parkinson’s is one of the fastest-growing neurological conditions. Behind the statistics are many people coping with tremor, rigidity and “off” periods—and carers holding everything together. Too many constituents face long waits for diagnosis, inconsistent annual reviews and patchy access to specialist nurses and community rehab. In West Sussex alone, more than 4,000 people are living with Parkinson’s. Most of them are over 65 years old, but there are also many younger people who have Parkinson’s and are trying to work and support their families. The Government have acknowledged the challenges, and we have already heard about the RightCare toolkit and the neurology transformation programme, but without targeted workforce and implementation funding, the guidance will not translate into timely care for patients, especially given the plan to restore the 18-week referral-to-treatment standard by 2029.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Dowd. I will be brief, as I appreciate there is not much time left. I wanted to speak in today’s debate because, as a public health consultant who has worked in international development for 20 years, I have watched the Global Fund and have not always been its greatest fan, I have to say. It has employed funding through vertical programmes for AIDS, TB and malaria. However, I stand corrected—politicians do not say that very often, but I do. I have seen the great work that the Global Fund has done. I have understood how it has taken a large amount of donor funding and put it to excellent use, resulting in serious reductions in three major infectious disease scourges of our time, including malaria, which 21 countries are now free of, thanks in major part to the Global Fund. It is not just about the three major diseases that the Global Fund works on; it is about health systems strengthening, which is where it has won my heart. It now understands that we cannot just have vertical health programmes to address those three major scourges; we have to invest in systems strengthening. I thank my friend who secured this debate, the hon. Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers). He talked about the Fleming Fund. As it comes to a close, we can address antimicrobial resistance through the Global Fund’s work on systems strengthening. I will conclude by talking about the UK pledge coming up imminently. In 2022, we pledged £1 billion. I am incredibly proud of the leadership the United Kingdom has shown in global health, and I very much hope—as has been alluded to, with regard to our co-hosting in South Africa—that we continue to show that leadership. I put on record that a potential 15% cut to that £1 billion would result in 220,000 fewer lives saved; 270,000 fewer people provided with antiretroviral treatment; 240,000 fewer people provided with tuberculosis treatment and care; and 20 million fewer people having access to mosquito nets, which provide much needed protection to children and families from this absolutely terrible disease. We have led the way in global health and we have been a systems leader. Do not get me wrong: this is not simply about funding—but a strong pledge by the UK at this eighth replenishment will absolutely signal that the UK remains dedicated to global health, and how important it is to our health systems as well as to the rest of the world.

• 28 Oct 2025 · Obesity and Fatty Liver Disease · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Mr Efford, for chairing the debate this morning. I thank the Minister for her excellent remarks, and all the parliamentary colleagues who have taken the time to be here. I thank the British Liver Trust and everybody who came to hear the debate. I hope they found it edifying and useful. I have no particular further remarks; I think most points have been covered. There is a lot of work to do. As has been said, 90% of liver disease is preventable. That is a serious amount of disease that we do not need to face in this country, which is incredibly important to remember. Our obesogenic environment—my hon. Friend the Member for Chelsea and Fulham (Ben Coleman) told me to say that slowly; it basically means it is hard for us to do healthy things and keep well—encourages us, consciously and subconsciously, to do things that are not great for our bodies. The Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Dr Johnson), said that we have agency. Of course we do, but we are humans in an environment that is telling us all sorts of things all the time. Our job as parliamentarians, as representatives of our residents, as members of the party that is governing the country, is to make sure that the messages and signals that we send, and the legislation that we pass, encourage a healthy environment for our residents to live in. Within that healthy environment, people can make their own choices. To those who accuse me and other public health consultants of being part of a nanny state, I say, frankly, the nanny we have in this state right now is not a great nanny. It is one that allows us to eat things that make us ill, that encourages us to not exercise, that makes our children sick and that means we die earlier than we need to. I do not want to live in a nanny state, but I do want to live in a healthy environment that allows our children to live well and allows all of us to live the lives that we want to lead—one that makes the healthy choice the easy choice, the affordable choice and the normal choice, and one where, if we want to do things that make us ill, we really have to try hard. I thank everybody for their time today. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered obesity and fatty liver disease.

• 28 Oct 2025 · Obesity and Fatty Liver Disease · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for that excellent point and agree absolutely. In our society, we focus on how people look for many reasons, cultural and commercial, but this is purely about health. This is about keeping people healthy on the inside and allowing them to live good quality lives. My hon. Friend is absolutely right in that sense. Poor diet is now the leading risk factor for death and disability. It is responsible for millions of preventable deaths each year. In the UK, almost two thirds of adults are overweight or are living with obesity, increasing the risk of fatty liver disease, cardiovascular disease and a multitude of cancers. In my job as a public health consultant, I see a lot of data and read many papers, but this statistic shocked me: four in 10 children with obesity may already have fatty liver disease. That demonstrates the urgent need to act now to prevent an even greater epidemic of disease in future. That has not happened by accident; it is the result of a broken food system, which has made the UK Europe’s third most obese country and one of the world’s biggest consumers of ultra-processed food. We have a system that makes the unhealthy choice the cheapest, easiest and most available choice. Healthier food now costs more than twice as much per calorie as unhealthy food. That is £10.24 per 1,000 kilocalories compared with £4.50. For fruit and vegetables, the cost is even more at £11.90 per 1,000 kilocalories. For the lowest income households, following a recommended healthy diet would swallow half or more of their disposable income. It is no surprise that obesity and fatty liver disease hit hardest in poorer communities. As I said at the beginning, this is not about personal failure. As hon. Members have said, sometimes people feel that that they are failing to lose weight and failing to keep themselves healthy. This is not about personal failure; it is a political failure. It is our collective failure to create a food environment that protects rather than undermines public health. If we are serious about prevention, we must be serious about reform—the right type—with stronger fiscal and regulatory measures to reduce the availability and marketing of foods that are high in fat, salt and sugar, and to rebuild a food system that serves public health and not profit. Why have we not addressed this yet? Weighted against the commercial gain of the food and drink industry, our obesogenic environment is killing our population and costing the taxpayer billions. Economic analysis last year suggests that excess weight costs the economy £126 billion a year. A Budget is coming up next month; I am fairly sure that our Chancellor would like £126 billion a year. That figure takes in wider factors, such as lost productivity, care costs and lost years of healthy life. The direct NHS cost of obesity is projected to rise from £6.5 billion to £9.7 billion by 2050. We cannot separate our health and our wealth, and we cannot hope to achieve economic growth without tackling issues such as obesity and fatty liver disease. Since 1990, there have been nearly 700 policies proposed by Government to reduce obesity. Imagine having 700 policies about your life! Past strategies fell short because they targeted behaviour change—individual choice—rather than the structural and commercial drivers of diet. Many lacked delivery plans, timelines or evaluation frameworks, leading to fragmented progress and limited long-term impact. What can we do now to ensure that this public health emergency is addressed? My key asks for our Health Minister, who is kindly listening here today, are as follows. First, there is a clear need for a national liver strategy, ensuring increased public awareness, early liver checks and primary care pathways. As stated earlier, every integrated care board should have a pathway for the early detection of liver disease. Secondly, we need strong planning and co-ordination to be ready to deliver the next generation of medication for liver disease. Thirdly, if we truly mean to deliver the left shift to prevention, promised in the 10-year health plan for England, then we have to change the environment that is driving poor health. There is strong consensus about the necessity of upstream interventions to regulate the unhealthy food and drink environment. We can build on that strong consensus to extend the levy model to high-sugar and high-salt foods; to enforce the 9 pm watershed for high fat, salt and sugar advertising, closing brand mark loopholes; to provide stable funding for local food partnerships, so that councils can act on local needs; to reinstate the full childhood obesity plan; and to address food affordability via fiscal reform. None of this is easy or it would have been done already, but right now our environment is draining our health service of billions each year and weighing heavily on the nation’s health—no pun intended. Let us not keep repeating our mistakes, but rather embed food policy as a national health priority. Through our work on preventing obesity and fatty liver disease, let us support and finally see the long-discussed and essential shift towards prevention and a healthier, wealthier country.