Edward Morello MP: speeches

Speeches

• 23 Jun 2025 · Pride Month · Hansard source

  More

  I did not plan on intervening, but we had a hustings during the election, and one of the questions was about the upcoming Sherborne Pride. Unfortunately, I was amazed that even in this day and age there was not unanimous support for a Sherborne Pride. My first act as an MP was to go to the inaugural Sherborne Pride, and we have the second one coming up in a couple of weeks. Does my hon. Friend believe that the importance of Pride is showing inclusion for everybody?

• 23 Jun 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T4. Some 40% of people in West Dorset who are in receipt of a personal independence payment receive the highest level of support. Many are extremely anxious about PIP assessments being carried out over the phone rather than in person, particularly those with complex or fluctuating conditions. Will the Minister guarantee that anyone who wants an in-person assessment will receive one?

• 18 Jun 2025 · Crime and Policing Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with the hon. Gentleman; we do not fully understand the lasting psychological damage, especially as this is a growing problem. I have received further letters from other people, who have told me about similar incidents in other schools, other towns and other playgrounds. Nationally, the problem is rising. According to the Youth Endowment Fund’s 2024 survey, 70% of young people reported seeing real-world violence online in the past year and that most of that footage was of fights involving young people. It is happening in our communities right now and the law is failing to keep pace. Our children already face enormous pressures from social media—from online bullying to apps designed to capture their attention and expose them to content far beyond their years. As parents, we do our best to protect them, but we cannot be everywhere. We have a duty to put proper deterrents in place where social media companies have continually failed us. We have a duty to send a clear message that this behaviour is unacceptable, that it is dangerous and that it will not go unpunished. I will finish with the words of Isabella’s mother, Sarah. She said: “I have to live with the flashbacks of watching my daughter being beaten. I also have to live knowing that this video will be forever available on social media.” On behalf of Sarah and of Isabella, I hope that the Government will support a change to the law so that something positive can come from Isabella’s experience.

• 18 Jun 2025 · Crime and Policing Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to speak to new clause 156 in my name, which I bring forward because of Isabella, a 14-year-old girl who lives in my constituency. In May of this year, Isabella was hanging out with friends in Lyme Regis when she was lured to the cemetery. A group of young people were waiting. One of them had their phone out and was already filming her arrival. Moments later, another girl who Isabella knew launched a brutal assault. Her head was smashed against a concrete step, she was stamped on and kicked in the face again and again. While Isabella was being attacked, no one stopped to help; instead, they stood by and they filmed. They laughed and they demanded they be sent the video. The attack was premeditated, but so too was the filming. The recording began before Isabella even arrived. It was not taken to provide evidence or to expose wrongdoing but taken deliberately to broadcast her humiliation and glorify the violence. I have seen the video; it is horrific. Isabella’s mother has seen the video, her friends have seen the video and hundreds, and possibly thousands, of people have seen the video because it was intentionally and maliciously circulated on social media and in private WhatsApp groups in schools across West Dorset. Children who were not there and who do not even know Isabella saw her brutal attack play out on their phones. The violence did not stop when the attack ended. It was shared, it was forwarded, it was replayed and it was whispered about. Isabella’s attacker was charged with actual bodily harm. She received anger management classes and a six-month restraining order. That was bad enough, but the people who filmed it walked away entirely unpunished. The filming had started before the attack occurred, they knew the attack was coming, they planned to film it and then they proceeded to share the video while laughing. They did not walk away unpunished because there was no proof of what they did—the video was the proof—but because our law does not yet recognise such specific, premeditated and deeply harmful behaviour as the offence that it should be. That is why I believe that new clause 156 is so important. It seeks to create a specific offence for premeditated filming and distribution of violent acts with the intent to humiliate, distress and psychologically harm the victims. It recognises what too many families already know: that this is not about a punch thrown or a kick delivered, but about the deliberate choice to film violence, broadcast it and humiliate the victim repeatedly for an audience that grows with every share, every click and every forwarded message. We are not talking about evidence or journalism, or about someone catching wrongdoing to expose it. Indeed, new clause 156 makes it very clear and contains an explicit safeguard to protect public interest journalism and for footage being used as evidence. Yet where there is premeditation and where someone knowingly films or broadcasts an attack with the intent to amplify the victim’s humiliation, that behaviour must face consequences. Isabella’s case is not an isolated one.

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

  More

  I absolutely agree. The costs for disabled people who live in rural areas include more expensive journeys to access healthcare, unreliable and sparse public transport, and higher energy bills for heating homes that are often older and less efficient. Hundreds of my constituents have expressed their concerns to me over the last few months, and I have retold some of their stories in this Chamber. Each one represents a wider failure. The Government’s own analysis shows that the proposed changes to PIP will push 300,000 people into poverty. About 150,000 carers stand to lose carers allowance due to the knock-on effect of losing PIP eligibility, harming those who care for the most vulnerable. I urge the Government to change course.

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

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I congratulate the hon. Member for Poole (Neil Duncan-Jordan), my colleague from Dorset, on securing this important debate. I will attempt to edit my speech as I go along to buy back some time. Ensuring fairness starts with recognising those who need support the most. The foundation of real support is ensuring that help reaches those who face the greatest challenges. The additional costs of disability—mobility aids, home adaptations, specialist care, heating and travel—add up and are all substantial. Scope estimates that disabled households need an extra £1,010 per month to achieve the same standard of living as a non-disabled household. Nearly 4,800 people in my constituency receive personal independence payments, of whom 40% receive the highest level of support.

• 16 Jun 2025 · Farmed Animals: Cages and Crates · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman raises the incredibly important issue of imports. Every pig or chicken farmer I speak to in West Dorset fully supports a transition, but they all raise the prospect of how we avoid driving up production costs and so increasing the cost to consumers and making imports look more attractive.

• 11 Jun 2025 · NHS Funding: South-west · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Torbay (Steve Darling) on securing the debate. I will be as brief as I can. I would love to talk about the lack of NHS dentist appointments in West Dorset or the problem with the funding model for community pharmacies, but instead I will just make the point that integrated care boards such as NHS Dorset are being asked to cut their staff by 50% on top of previous cuts of 30%. These are the people who ensure that frontline services run smoothly, and I am concerned that gutting their capacity in such numbers so quickly risks destabilising the very system that we are trying to fix. Although NHS Dorset has a plan in place to break even, it is reliant on delivering £190 million in savings. The trust has requested £14 million in additional financial support, but remains £22 million short of its funding target. There is also a pressing need for capital investment in digital infrastructure to help modernise hospital estates, such as Dorset county hospital, to streamline services. The closure of the maternity unit at Yeovil means that Dorset county hospital in Dorchester is picking up much of the slack; it is looking after more patients with no additional cash. The fact is that delivering services in rural communities in the south-west is more expensive than it is in urban areas. What steps are the Government taking to ensure that rural communities are no longer left behind?

• 10 Jun 2025 · Decoupling Electricity and Gas Prices · Hansard source

  More

  New solar is 11% cheaper than the lowest-cost fossil fuel, and onshore wind is 39% cheaper, yet the marginal pricing system that ties electricity costs to the market price of gas has resulted in British consumers enduring the fourth-highest global energy prices during a cost of living crisis. Does the Minister agree that decoupling electricity prices from the gas market is essential if consumers are to enjoy lower-cost energy?

• 10 Jun 2025 · Decoupling Electricity and Gas Prices · Hansard source

  More

  7. What steps his Department is taking to decouple electricity and gas prices.

• 22 May 2025 · Access to NHS Dentistry · Hansard source

  More

  I know that my hon. Friend’s constituency suffers from a lot of the same issues as West Dorset, given their similarity. The consequences of the lack of NHS dental care are stark: only 36% of adults in West Dorset have seen a dentist in the past two years, and just 50% of children have had a dental appointment in that time—an alarming 9% lower than in 2019. I know that the Government have announced a rescue plan to provide 700,000 more urgent dental appointments and to recruit new dentists to the areas that need them most. That is welcome news, but how exactly are the areas with the most need being assessed? What specific provisions are being made to ensure that rural areas such as West Dorset, where the population density is low but unmet demand is high, are not left behind once again?

• 22 May 2025 · Access to NHS Dentistry · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is right that a lot of this comes down to the funding model. When funding is allocated under the current model, it is always rural communities that lose out. I ask that the rurality of places such as West Dorset be recognised in both the workplace planning and the resource allocation, because the south-west has the highest rate of dental-related A&E visits—217 per 100,000 people. That is one in every 460 people turning to emergency care because they cannot get an NHS dentist’s appointment. Preventable oral health issues are flooding our hospitals because we have failed to resource our community dental services. The Government have made some minor tweaks to the dysfunctional NHS contract, which is welcome, but morale is at an all-time low. Over 60% of dentists in England are thinking of leaving the NHS all together. The current contract often leaves dentists losing money on every NHS patient they see—for example, a typical dentist loses £42.60 per denture fitted. That is unsustainable, and it is time to reform the system as a whole, because change cannot wait. I ask the Government to come forward with a clear timeline for negotiating on contract reform, and to properly support integrated care boards, as my hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) said, with ringfenced funding for dental services. The Liberal Democrats are calling for a comprehensive dental rescue package that would guarantee access to an NHS dentist for everyone in need of urgent or emergency care. It would also ensure NHS dental check-ups for those already eligible, including children, pregnant women, new mothers and people on low incomes. In addition, the package would guarantee that anyone beginning chemotherapy, undergoing a transplant or facing critical treatment receives the essential dental assessments that they need beforehand. I would like the Government to reverse the cuts to public health grants, which have fallen by 26% in real terms since 2015, to restore funding for preventive oral health programmes, to expand supervised toothbrushing for children in schools and nurseries, and to scrap the VAT on children’s toothbrushes and toothpaste. I ask the Government to act now. On behalf of my constituents and all rural communities, I ask that communities such as mine in West Dorset are not treated as an afterthought in the funding model, but are given priority.

• 22 May 2025 · Access to NHS Dentistry · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the hon. Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) on securing the debate. I was delighted to be able to support her application, because this issue deeply affects my constituents. Dentistry is in crisis nationally, and nowhere is that felt more so than in rural communities such as West Dorset. In my constituency we have just 15 dental practices offering any form of NHS dental care, serving a population of more than 94,000.

• 21 May 2025 · Broadband and Mobile Connectivity: Rural Areas · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister asked for specific questions. Part of the problem is that the cost of customer acquisition is four to five times larger in rural Britain than it is in urban areas, so the big companies prioritise urban areas, where they can find a lot of customers, leaving rural areas to small businesses that then face the capital cost issue that he refers to. My specific question is this: how can the Government help those small businesses that are trying to connect rural communities to go faster?

• 21 May 2025 · Business and the Economy · Hansard source

  More

  I was touched by the hon. Gentleman’s story of his father’s role in contributing to the economy. I hope that he will be present in the immigration debate later this afternoon to make the same points about the vital work of immigrants contributing to wealth creation in the UK. The hon. Gentleman mentions NICs and the other headwinds facing small businesses. One small business in West Dorset has seen its business rates go from £8,000 to £27,000. If we want to help small businesses grow, surely we have to stop taxing them so much.

• 21 May 2025 · Parkinson’s Disease · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart—especially after that flattery. I congratulate the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) on securing this important debate. Parkinson’s, as has been said, is the fastest growing neurological condition in the world. But behind every statistic is a family, a carer, a friend—someone whose daily life is shared by this illness. My constituents have written to me about their experiences of loved ones living with the disease. The stories they have shared are heart-breaking, with long waits for specialist care, difficulties accessing the right medication on time, and exhausting battles for financial and social support. I know I speak for many here when I say that we must do more. Parkinson’s is a progressive condition, with more than 40 possible symptoms affecting movement, sleep, mental health, speech, eating and swallowing. Nearly half of those living with it will experience anxiety or depression, and more than half will develop psychotic symptoms as the condition progresses. Across the country, there are long waits for specialist care, a lack of multidisciplinary teams with Parkinson’s experience, and serious difficulties in accessing vital medication in a timely and consistent way. We urgently need to overhaul the way that care is provided for people with Parkinson’s, particularly in rural areas. That begins with primary care. GPs are the front door to the NHS, yet we know that continuity of care is beginning to be eroded. That is why the Liberal Democrats are calling for everyone with a long-term condition such as Parkinson’s to have access to a named GP—someone who can understand their history and needs, and can advocate for timely referrals and co-ordinated care. This is not just about funding more; it is about funding smarter. Primary and community care can prevent some hospital admissions and provide medication and essential support for those who cannot easily travel. That is especially important in rural areas like mine, where distance, isolation and sparse public transport already pose significant barriers to treatment. Care services are struggling with conditions like Parkinson’s and have been stretched to breaking point by Government decisions and a lack of funding. Weldmar Hospicecare in West Dorset is a lifeline for so many families. Earlier this year, NHS Dorset announced a £400,000 cut to its fast-track funding, starting next April. Weldmar also faces a £600,000 increase in costs as a result of rising national insurance contributions and other pressures. It already raises 60% of its NHS-commissioned care through charitable donations, and that is unsustainable in the long term. The same goes for our community pharmacies, which are vital for people with Parkinson’s, especially in rural communities. They are not just dispensaries; they provide healthcare consultations, medical reviews and early advice, often acting as the first point of contact for worried patients. Yet the funding model they rely on is outdated and inadequate, leaving many rural pharmacies on the brink of collapse. If we are serious about reducing health inequalities, we must ringfence funding for essential services and not allow it to disappear into ever-wider budget allocations. We owe it to everyone living with Parkinson’s, and to the families, the carers and the health workers supporting them, to do better. That means listening to the voices of those people affected, ending the postcode lottery and making sure that no one, wherever they live, faces this devastating disease alone.

• 21 May 2025 · Parkinson’s Disease · Hansard source

  More

  I will answer that with one of my favourite facts about Dorset: if we were a country, we would be the oldest in the world by population age. We are older than Japan.

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

  More

  I thank the hon. Lady for securing this important debate, and I agree 100% with the point that she is making. Two constituents in West Dorset support two children with multiple needs—overlapping autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and significant trauma of the kind she mentioned. The funding for a one-off assessment remains, but the ongoing funding to support those children no longer exists, and that is a fundamental problem.

• 19 May 2025 · Mental Health Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  Just to follow up on my hon. Friend’s point about the importance of mental health hubs, in West Dorset the only child and adolescent mental health services centre is in Dorchester, and for many people in my constituency, especially young people, that means at least a 30-mile round trip to access services. In rural Britain, we are lucky if transport links exist, and those that do are often limited. That makes accessing services nearly impossible, which is what makes hubs so important.

• 15 May 2025 · Solar Farms · Hansard source

  More

  Will the right hon. Member give way?

• 15 May 2025 · Solar Farms · Hansard source

  More

  I would just point out that the reason we get that concentration: grid capacity. The grid is constrained in the areas where there is the highest level of demand. It is unconstrained in the areas where we have the least amount of demand, which are rural areas. That is why we keep getting applications there. If we upgrade the grid, we will not have that problem.

• 15 May 2025 · Solar Farms · Hansard source

  More

  I should declare that prior to entering this House, I spent the better part of a decade working in renewable energy finance. While I would not claim to be a solar expert, I could certainly write a whole speech debunking things that have been said today. For the record, solar panels have a lower carbon footprint per unit generated than the equivalent fossil fuel. They are 95% recyclable, and any solar farm development requires a glint-and-glare report before it gets approval if it is anywhere near an Air Force base or an airport. I will move on, because I could go on for a long time. Those of us who believe in science know that tackling climate change means making bold, practical choices about how we decarbonise our economy. If we are serious about reaching net zero, tackling fuel poverty and protecting our countryside, we have to make renewables work for people as well as the planet. I have often made the point that the solar sector is not particularly good at communicating the benefits of a just transition to the population at large, so let me be clear: solar power means cheaper bills for consumers, protection against geopolitical insecurity and a greener future for the next generation.

• 15 May 2025 · Solar Farms · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman will be pleased to know that the answer is in my speech. We have made substantial progress on decarbonising our power grid: a decade ago, just 6% of our energy came from renewables, and today, the figure stands at 42%. That is a national achievement we should be proud of, but we must go further, not just because the climate emergency demands it, but because renewables are the cheapest source of energy available. Liberal Democrats believe strongly in expanding use of solar and other renewables to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, improve energy security and bring down bills. Crucially, we believe that this must be done while protecting our natural environment. A strategic land use framework is essential if we are serious about delivering net zero while safeguarding our ability to produce food and restore nature. We are asking more and more of the countryside—to produce food, capture carbon, generate clean energy, support biodiversity and provide space for housing, tourism and recreation. Without a joined-up approach, we risk pitting these priorities against one another. It is vital that a framework gives clear national guidance on where solar is most appropriate; sets out that solar should avoid high-quality agricultural land wherever possible; and encourages dual-use solutions that support both energy generation and nature recovery. It must enable local authorities to plan ahead with confidence, and to balance competing pressures in a way that reflects the needs and character of their communities. Planning policy should not be dictated solely by where grid connections are available, but by a long-term vision of how we want our land to be used. It is a common claim that instead of putting solar panels on fields, we should put them on rooftops and car parks. I do not disagree, but having worked in the sector, I feel obligated—I make this point a lot—to explain the commercial realities. If utility-scale solar costs 50p per unit to build, rooftop solar is roughly double that, and carports double that again. Meanwhile, energy companies pay as little as 5p or 5.5p per unit for energy exported to the grid. That means that pure-export rooftop and carport solar does not stack up financially for investors, but that is something that the Government can fix. By mandating a minimum export price, we could unlock rooftop and car port investment, reduce pressure on farmland and cut consumer bills. Yes, wholesale energy buyers would earn a little less, but consumers, communities and the climate would all benefit. This is an easy win for a Government who have stated their commitment to net zero. Ground-mounted solar will invariably remain part of the energy mix, and we cannot reach our climate targets without it, but projects must be done right, which means prioritising lower grade land and ensuring that new schemes come with tangible benefits for the communities they affect. Community benefit funds should receive a fair share of the wealth created. My hon. Friend the Member for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos) has tabled new clauses to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill to deliver just that, alongside local authority powers to invest in energy efficiency and support street-by-street upgrades to reduce bills. In Scotland, for example, community benefit is worth £5,000 per installed megawatt per year. That means that a controversial large-scale solar project, such as the Kingsway solar farm in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for South Cambridgeshire (Pippa Heylings), would provide £2.5 million annually to the local community. That is the scale we should be talking about, and it must be the community that determines how and where that money is spent. Today, about two thirds of UK solar is ground-mounted, but rooftop solar has a critical role to play and the Liberal Democrats are proud to be leading on that issue. We welcome the Government’s decision to adopt our policy of mandating solar panels on the roofs of new homes, which is a core part and first step of our rooftop revolution. We also call on Ministers to go further, by requiring new homes to meet net zero building standards and include provision for solar generation. When it comes to delivery, Liberal Democrats in local government are showing what can be done. From Barkham solar farm in Wokingham to Sandscale park in Westmorland and the thousands of car park panels installed in Portsmouth, we are delivering clean energy at scale, backed by communities. Delivery must also be responsible, and I know that many of us are concerned about the number of solar farms being approved on our best agricultural land. Let me be clear: I am yet to meet a farmer who got into farming because they wanted to grow solar panels; this is happening because making a living from farming is increasingly impossible. We must ensure that farming is sustainable, profitable, and properly supported, so that farmers can keep doing what they do best, which is producing brilliant British food and looking after the land. I also share concerns about the use of nationally significant infrastructure project schemes, which are taking land out of use. That raises questions about long-term land use and oversight, particularly given the level of foreign investment in the sector. Finally, a very quick word on standards—I appreciate that I am testing your patience, Madam Deputy Speaker. There are genuine concerns about labour practices in the global solar supply chain, but the industry is taking action. Having been part of the Solar Energy UK supply chain sustainability working group when it was first constituted, I can personally attest that the industry is taking the issue very seriously. Through the solar stewardship initiative, robust environmental, social and governance and traceability standards are being applied to ensure compliance with UK and EU laws. By the end of this year, certified facilities will be producing 100 GW of panels annually, which is five times the UK’s current capacity. As a result, we can be confident that we can meet our targets without compromising our values. The potential of solar is enormous. It can drive down bills, reduce emissions and create thousands of jobs, as well as protect our countryside.

• 15 May 2025 · Solar Farms · Hansard source

  More

  It might be worth making the point that only 10% of solar applications end up being built. The cumulative number of applications is completely irrelevant; what matters is the number that are actually built on the land, so while 7% of a constituency may be covered by applications, that is not a reflection of the percentage that will be built on.

• 14 May 2025 · Carer’s Leave · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) on securing this important debate. She has been an advocate for carers throughout her parliamentary career, and I thank her for all her hard work. Unpaid carers are the backbone of Britain’s social care system. They carry out remarkable and irreplaceable roles, often with little help and too often at great personal cost. I would like to tell the story of one of my constituents, Sarah. She spent nearly 30 years as a full-time carer for her son, who has profound and complex needs. He suffered neurological damage before and during birth, and although he is verbal, he has severe autism and behavioural challenges, which, through no fault of his own, have dominated the lives of everyone around him. Sarah’s story is one of lifelong dedication and unconditional love. For years, her son’s unpredictable behaviour dictated his family’s routine. He was excluded from multiple schools and, later, from supported living settings because his needs were too challenging to manage in shared environments. He now lives with one-to-one professional carers. The support that he receives is of a high standard, but it costs as much as all the benefits he receives. Sarah no longer qualifies for carer’s allowance because her son no longer lives at home. However, as a mother she remains deeply involved in his care. Over the years, she has given up work. She is approaching 60 with no pension or savings and with health problems of her own. On top of that, she now supports her elderly in-laws and ageing parents. Like so many others, she is a carer several times over—unseen, unpaid and exhausted. Sarah described herself to me as simply “broken” from years of having no room to breathe or recover. Sarah contacted me not just because of the long hours of care or the loss of income, but because of the fear caused by the Government’s proposed changes to disability benefits, especially the personal independence payment. Her son relies on PIP; the suggestion that that support could be taken away or turned into a voucher system has devastated Sarah’s mental health. She told me that she cannot sleep and feels physically unwell from anxiety. Carer’s leave is designed to support those who give so much of themselves to care for family and friends, but we must ensure that that support is not undermined by other policies. When carers are able to share some of their responsibilities with professional services and return to work, they should encounter stability, not the prospect that they will have to return to full-time caring because of sudden changes. However, proposals such as the changes to PIP risk having exactly that effect, which causes immense anxiety among the very people who we claim to be helping, including Sarah, who worries whether her son will be affected or not. Carer’s allowance is just £81.90 a week, which is the lowest amount for a benefit of its kind. Worse still, carers are being punished for going even slightly over their earnings threshold. Tens of thousands of carers are being asked to repay thousands of pounds each, and often through no fault of their own. Indeed, many of them did not even know that they had gone over the threshold, and in many cases it was the Department for Work and Pensions that had failed to update their records in time. That is yet another example of carers being treated as an afterthought. I am immensely proud that the Liberal Democrats, thanks to the hard work of my hon. Friend the Member for North East Fife, passed the Carer’s Leave Act 2023. The Act gives 2 million employees across the UK the legal right to at least one week of unpaid carer’s leave each year, which was a crucial first step, but now we must go further and make that paid leave. Caring is vital, emotionally draining and complex work, which deserved to be recognised as such. That is why we should introduce paid carer’s leave and consult on extending the eligibility for it. We should also give unpaid carers a statutory guarantee of regular respite breaks, and not just when a council can afford them. We should also increase carer’s allowance by at least £20 a week, with higher earning thresholds and a taper, so that people are not penalised for doing extra hours at work. Sarah’s story is not unique. Her exhaustion, her fear and her resilience are echoed in stories in millions of households up and down the country. We owe it to her and to every unpaid carer to stop taking them for granted.