What Britain's parties say and do in public, recorded from the source.
Every entry links to Hansard, Parliament, the Electoral Commission or the party's own channel. Every party is tracked by the same rules. Methodology
Labour Party
Latest entry 11 Nov 2026
Conservative and Unionist Party
Latest entry 11 Nov 2026
Liberal Democrats
Latest entry 11 Nov 2026
Reform UK
Latest entry 11 Nov 2026
Scottish National Party
Latest entry 11 Nov 2026
Green Party
Latest entry 11 Nov 2026
Plaid Cymru
Latest entry 10 Nov 2026
Showing every spoken contribution, including 12,942 under 12 words. Hide short remarks
This is a process point, but will the Minister confirm to the House whether, if the revival motion fails, the promoters can bring in another Bill at a time that suits them, ideally with some of these issues resolved?
A remarkable North Somerset constituent, Jane, is watching this debate. Having been diagnosed in March last year with an incurable brain tumour, Jane has asked me to speak in the debate, because she wants us all to understand what it feels like to be told, “Treatment will manage your tumour, not cure it.” Does my hon. Friend agree that my constituent Jane is not just brave, but amazing?
The message from more than 1,200 North Somerset children, families and parents—like myself—could not be clearer: they wholeheartedly welcome the direction of travel today. However, spring 2027 feels too long to wait; every day that passes is another day on which children are exposed to harmful algorithms, addictive features, inappropriate advertising and contact from strangers online. So I ask my right hon. Friend: what are the barriers to implementing the policy sooner?
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I thank the 54 constituents of Newport West and Islwyn who signed the petition calling for an increased focus on tackling brain cancer. I will speak about Owain’s law, a campaign that seeks to end the postcode lottery across the UK in accessing brain tumour tissue freezing. That is critical for preserving the fresh DNA and RNA samples needed for later advanced genomic testing, clinical trials and personalised treatment. The current postcode lottery in accessing fresh brain tissue freezing means reduced treatment options for many and barely improving survival rates for decades. I was really pleased to meet Ellie James again last week, after her husband Owain died from a grade 4 brain tumour aged just 35. During his treatment, Owain and Ellie pursued a personalised cancer vaccine using Owain’s tumour tissue. However, just 1 cm of the 7 cm tumour removed during the surgery was fresh frozen. While that allowed three personalised vaccines to be made, when the tumour returned no further treatments could be made. Owain later died in June 2024. No one had discussed with Owain or his family how the tissue would be preserved or the implications of that decision. Like others, I again press the Minister on whether she will set out a funded delivery plan to close these gaps in freezer capacity. No one should have a postcode lottery on those important matters of life and death. Will she commission new national guidance on the removal and freezing of suitable brain tissue following diagnosis? Owain’s tragic case needs to be learned from if we are to improve treatments for those with brain cancer. Relatively small investments, which are already waiting to be spent, could close the postcode lottery in freezing capacity, ensure uniform quality of care and have the potential to be truly transformational.
In the large group of 16 to 18-year-olds from schools in my constituency that I discussed a potential ban with, there was no consensus about whether there should be a ban, but there was strong consensus that they needed good-quality information and education to prevent harm. Will the measures that the Minister mentioned use the best behaviour science knowledge that we have? Will the advice and—
I welcome my right hon. Friend’s announcement; she has worked tireless on this issue. I want to draw her attention to vulnerable over-16s who are being targeted by organised criminals and predatory behaviour, including from sexual predators, as well as extremist far-right individuals and religious extremists who are radicalising them online. Alongside the very important announcement she has made today, will she set out how she will work with other Departments to protect vulnerable young adults?
Little Stanion in my constituency is a brilliant community with lots of first-time buyers who moved there to put down roots, but they have been let down time and again. The developer went into administration and the management agency connected to the developer continues to ask for more money, with no transparency in how it is spent. When the roads fall apart, they have no one to turn to; when the community centre still looks like a building site, they get no update; and when the play equipment starts to break, the Little Stanion Farm Management Company becomes hostile. Will the Secretary of State outline what more we can do for new build areas such as Little Stanion, so that they do not keep getting let down?
I thank the Secretary of State and the Minister for online safety, the hon. Member for Vale of Glamorgan (Kanishka Narayan), for their engagement and conversations on this issue. I had social media before I was 16. I deeply understand the concerns, and have experienced the bad, but I also know the value, particularly for working-class kids, of seeing a world outside one’s own—the value for the boy who is growing up without a father and learns to shave from YouTube, for the young person who teaches themselves to code and shapes their career, or for the LGBT community. How is the Department working directly with DFE and DCMS to ensure that we identify these areas of need?
Parents across North Warwickshire and Bedworth responding to my survey told me overwhelmingly that they feel powerless to protect their children from the harms of social media, where they are told that they are not pretty enough, thin enough, cool enough or good enough at their favourite sport—or, worse still, where pictures are shared without their consent or suicide is pushed. Now is the moment that we say enough is enough in order to put children’s health and happiness first. But we know that a ban alone will not be enough. Does the Minister agree that we must ensure that a cliff edge at 16 is avoided and that kids who do get around the rules are protected by compelling big tech to take action to protect everyone, rather than allowing them to profit from doomscrolling, division, hatred and despair?
My hon. Friend will know how enthusiastic I am for a Thames Valley foundation strategic authority covering Berkshire, Oxfordshire and Swindon, but he will also know of my concerns about a spatial development strategy being imposed on us using a different, larger geography. Does he share my concern that that would undermine devolution before it even started?
My hon. Friend may or may not be aware that the proposers of the Bill can withdraw it at a time of their choosing. If amendments were to be made to the Bill, I fear that the proposers would simply choose to withdraw it from consideration.
Cornish towns such as St Austell and Redruth desperately need support for their high streets, but Pride in Place criteria such as those on community cohesion and green spaces count against such towns. It is virtually impossible to be in Cornwall and not be close to green spaces. As those criteria are starting to be used across Departments, will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss how they are currently counting against areas such as Cornwall?
Order. I am sorry to all hon. and right hon. Members, because I will have to impose a two-minute time limit straightaway, and it is clear that we will not get everyone in.
I thank the hon. Member for setting a fine example of keeping to the time limit.
I call Ann Davies.
Order.
I beg to move, That this House has considered e-petition 738881 relating to brain cancer research and treatment. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Barker. I thank Sarah Bainbridge and the rest of Brain Cancer Justice for creating the petition that has led to this debate. Although it was established only last year, it has already built a remarkable campaign and secured support from more than 109,000 people for the petition—well done and thanks very much. The petition calls for increased funding to accelerate discoveries and clinical trials, improved access to whole-genome sequencing with personalised treatment and the protection of the right of patients to try innovative treatment options. It is not the first time that Parliament has debated this issue. Just over a decade ago, a petition calling for greater funding for brain tumour research received more than 120,000 signatures, which led to a Petitions Committee inquiry report.
I absolutely agree. I have spoken to Peter, and it was remarkable what they did then. The inquiry—there have not been many petition inquiries—was a result of the work they did, and it has certainly made sure that the subject has not gone away. That petition recognised that brain tumour patients have been failed “at every stage” of the research and funding process. As a result of that and the inquiry, some progress followed: a task and finish working group was established, and in 2018 the Government pledged £40 million for brain tumour research. However, by 2024 only £15 million of it had been delivered. Many further petitions have been brought forward by campaigners, but meaningful progress continues to stall.
Absolutely. That is a key element of the work that needs to be done to help patients with this issue. I will refer to that later, but it is fundamental. We know that, without that research, nothing will improve and we will continue to see the terrible conditions and quality of life that people have to face.
I was not aware of that, but clearly it is unacceptable and makes no sense whatever. We really need to use our experience right across this nation. I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman. It is a fact that in the UK brain tumours remain the biggest cancer killer of children and of adults under the age of 40. Approximately 13,000 people are diagnosed each year. For those who are diagnosed with a high-grade brain tumour, the five-year survival rate remains just 12.9%.
Absolutely. I use the word again: it is fundamental. Without it, there is no real way forward. We will continue to repeat the same treatments that we have seen for many years. Those treatments are not fully effective, as we know, so we need research to develop new and innovative approaches. I have referred to some statistics, but we have to remember that behind every statistic is a family. Each family are pursuing every available treatment, and all too often they are turning to crowdfunding to travel overseas in search of a cure, because significant barriers continue to block progress here at home. Workforce shortages also limit access to care. Only 40% of patients have a clinical nurse specialist, and there is a 30% shortfall in consultant radiologists. Early-career researchers lack funding and support, which pushes talent away from this field. That is especially damaging because scientists from diverse disciplines are essential for the development of new treatments. System failures also prevent the limited available funding from reaching patients in a meaningful way. Whole-genome sequencing is not routinely available at diagnosis, and access to a clinical trial remains severely restricted.
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely correct. This work cannot be done by just one centre, either in this country or elsewhere in Europe or the world. It certainly makes sense to connect expertise more, both within our nation and with our partners, particularly in Europe but also across the US. As of May this year, only 15 active trials were available to brain tumour patients, compared with 54 for pancreatic cancer, which is another disease of unmet need.
Yes, I do. At the front end, we need to improve diagnosis. I have personal knowledge of that through my youngest daughter. Unfortunately, it took some time for one of her friends to be diagnosed with this awful disease, and he is now at a similar stage, where it is extremely difficult for him to receive the treatment he needs. Diagnosis is extremely important. Clinicians continue to raise concerns about the collection, storage and use of tumour tissue, despite the fact that it is vital to supporting research and innovation. Unfortunately, NHS trusts differ markedly in capacity and resources, creating a postcode lottery for diagnosis and advanced treatments. As we know, brain tumours are complex; there are more than 100 distinct types, nearly 40% of patients in England are diagnosed in emergency care, and the blood-brain barrier limits the effectiveness of medicines. Such challenges have led many to dismiss tackling brain cancer as “too difficult”. That is clearly still an obstacle. We have to break the view that brain cancer falls into that box. In my meetings with campaigners, patients and families, their frustration with that notion is unmistakable. They know, as we do, that with the right support these barriers can be overcome. The Government have recently announced welcome initiatives, including those in the Rare Cancers Act 2026, the national cancer plan and the brain tumour research consortium, supported by the £13.7 million to unite 48 hospitals, universities, cancer centres and charities in partnership with patients. However, that must be seen as just the first step. Much of this activity simply disburses the remainder of the existing funding pledged, and brain tumours still receive just 3.2% of national cancer research funding.
The simple answer is yes, I totally agree. The hon. Lady has summed it up perfectly. In 2023-24, charities provided 74% of all investment, which of course left just 26% coming from Government. There is a clear link between funding and survival. Investment enables more clinical trials, better patient recruitment and improved access to innovation. I therefore call on the Government to set out how much funding will be ringfenced, and to raise their contribution to between £45 million and £50 million by 2029 in line with the recommendations from Brain Tumour Research. At the same time, we must recognise that funding alone will not deliver the progress we urgently need. The wider research and innovation environment must be reformed so that discoveries progress more efficiently into clinical development and patient access. Discovery research is essential, yet many innovations still fail to cross the translational valley of death, where fragmented, high-risk and unsupported pathways cause breakthroughs to stall. Stronger collaboration between institutions is needed to accelerate early-stage research, and the Government should also clarify the role of UK Research and Innovation within the national cancer plan, given its central contribution to discovery science. In addition, health technology assessment reform is required so that appraisal bodies adopt fairer and more flexible cost-effectiveness thresholds for rare and less survivable cancers, including brain tumours. Patient awareness is essential. As Professor Kathreena Kurian highlighted, many patients are left unaware that they must give consent for their tumour tissue to be used in advanced diagnostics and research. Every eligible patient must have proactive conversations with their clinical team about research opportunities. Greater participation is essential to attract investment, and when trials are easier to set up and recruit for, commercial and academic partners are more likely to set up further studies in the UK. Alongside that, we must address an issue repeatedly raised by patients and families: the right to pursue innovative treatment when standard options have been exhausted. Too many families find themselves travelling abroad, seeking repurposed drugs or raising money online to access treatments. No family should be forced to remortgage their home, empty savings or appeal to strangers online simply to pursue the possibility of more time. These improvements depend on one further requirement: strong national leadership. Currently, no single body within the Government, NHS England or the wider health system holds clear ownership of brain cancer outcomes. Where responsibility is spread everywhere, accountability exists nowhere. Patients deserve to know who is responsible for delivering change. Before I close, I will return to the reason the petition exists. In October 2022, Sarah Bainbridge’s daughter Jess was diagnosed with glioblastoma, an aggressive brain cancer that, until then, her family had never heard of. Jess underwent treatment, including two operations, but her family soon realised that once the standard options were exhausted, very few alternatives remained. Like many other families, they found themselves searching beyond established pathways. Jess died in November 2023. She was just 35 years old, and had three children: Alfred, who was five, and one-year-old twins Billy and Alba. In Sarah’s words: “If I am honest, we have needed Jess every single day since she died, and we still do.” This is not just Jess’s story; it is the story of thousands of families across the UK. Following Jess’s death, Sarah met Georgie Maynard, a young mother living with glioblastoma. Although their circumstances were different, they shared the same frustration: that patients and families were still facing many of the same barriers identified decades earlier. Together, they founded Brain Cancer Justice, not for sympathy or recognition, but to call for urgent change. It was my privilege to meet with Brain Cancer Justice in the lead-up to this debate, and I encourage Ministers to do the same. This should not only be about recognition or reassurance but about ending broken promises, raising ambition and protecting delivery. Patients and families have waited long enough: we must turn “terminal” into “treatable”.
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I am delighted that Cherrywood in my hon. Friend’s constituency will receive up to £20 million over the next decade through the Government’s expanded Pride in Place programme. The Government have committed significant sums of money to equipping communities with the resources and power to drive local change, so that they can bring people together and restore a sense of pride in their area.
I commend my hon. Friend on her strong campaigning to secure investment for her area. She asked an important question about local people having a say over their areas—because they know best. The Pride in Place programme represents a break from the micromanagement approach taken with previous regeneration funds. Local boards are provided with the power of intervention and the autonomy that they need to pursue the change that their communities want. Youth centres, libraries, green spaces, cultural venues and help for families, including family hubs, will all be in scope of support for more cohesive and resilient communities.
I thank the hon. Member for raising that important issue. The English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act 2026 goes some way towards addressing it, but I highlight that the Government are pushing ahead with high-street rental auctions, which are helping to bring long-term empty shops back into use.
The cheer across the House is a second reminder for me of the importance of coastal communities; the first reminder came when I responded to the Adjournment debate in the week before last. The Government are committed to mayoral strategic authorities having the fiscal tools to drive good growth in these areas. We have recently consulted on extending those power to FSAs, and will publish a response shortly.
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that important issue. I will point to two things: first, later this year we will bring forward a high street strategy backed by at least £150 million; and secondly, as I said earlier, we are pushing ahead with the high street rental auctions programme, which is already seeing empty shops being brought back into use.
Having served as a council leader, I know just how important community assets are, and I am happy to meet the hon. Member to discuss the matter further.
I join my hon. Friend in recognising the significant investment for his area. The Pride in Place programme, rolled out by the Government, is our commitment to devolution, and we are investing in areas that have been ignored for far too long.
3. What steps he is taking to help improve response times to fires in Poole constituency.
My hon. Friend will know that Dorset and Wiltshire Fire and Rescue Service has received an 11.8% increase in core spending power. Despite that, there are plans to merge Hamworthy fire station with the one in Poole. Not only will this increase response times, but it fails to take account of specific challenges in the area, such as flooding, heathland fires and seasonal increases in traffic. Will the Minister consider what more can be done to keep Hamworthy fire station open?
I would like to thank the young people in my constituency from Ark Blake Academy, Oasis Academy Arena and Oasis Academy Shirley Park for meeting me to share their views on how to keep them safe online. They were clear that they wanted action against the harmful aspects of social media, but wanted to protect the good bits. Can the Secretary of State outline the work being done across Government to ensure that young people continue to have access to safe opportunities to connect, both online and in their communities? Does she agree that it is time to give proper statutory protection to youth services, so that we ensure that all young people have somewhere safe to go, and something meaningful to do IRL?
My constituency, and particularly Ramsgate, is a maritime community, so awareness of the importance of safety and security at sea resonates with people across it. This ship appears to have been operating under the flag of Cameroon—a flag of convenience that the shadow fleet used to avoid being properly policed. What efforts are the UK Government making—independently, with their allies or through international channels—to deter flagging states from offering stateless ships the cover of apparent respectability and lawfulness?
Last Friday, I joined pupils at St Bede’s Roman Catholic primary school for their internet safety assembly. Thanks to their headteacher’s regular internet safety assemblies, St Bede’s children are now well versed in the subject. Does the Secretary of State agree that today’s announcement will support the work of many schools and teachers, and send a clear message to big tech that it must now match that commitment?
My hon. Friend and I know that our constituencies are somewhat similar. My Carlisle constituents currently have to travel 12 miles to find a dental practice that is taking patients. That is an improvement: last year they had to go to Yorkshire to find an NHS practice that was taking on new patients. Does she agree that the steps this Government are taking to rebuild NHS dentistry need to be focused on our rural and coastal communities, such as our two constituencies?
I thank the Secretary of State and her team for their work on this matter, but I want to understand better how the Government will look at social media companies to make sure that there is transparency in the algorithms they are using and that they are not continuing to target children.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today, Mrs Barker. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for introducing the petition on behalf of the many people who signed it and secured the debate today. It has been so well attended, as we can see from the number of Members here and the fact that the Gallery is full, which really shows its importance. Earlier this month, I was honoured to join a meeting of the all-party parliamentary group on brain tumours, which was also very well attended, and to hear the personal stories and lived experience shared by those affected by brain cancer. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) for her tireless work as the chair of the all-party group and for her committed campaigning on behalf of brain cancer patients in memory of her sister Margaret McDonagh, who so many of us knew so well and remember so fondly.
Absolutely. I cannot think of a worthier cause than turning brain cancer from terminal to treatable. That is something that we can absolutely all get behind. I am especially grateful to Brain Cancer Justice, which led the campaign for the petition and this very well-attended debate, as well as Brain Tumour Research and the Brain Tumour Charity. They all do fantastic work advocating for people diagnosed with a brain tumour and their loved ones. Since this Government came into office, over 232,000 more people got a cancer diagnosis or an all-clear on time, about 42,000 more patients started treatment on time, and rates of early diagnosis are hitting record highs. A lot has been done, but there is a lot more to do, especially on rare and less common cancers. That is why my predecessor, my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton), made sure that the national cancer plan would be the first plan in history to have a chapter dedicated to rare cancers. There are not enough treatment options available for people with brain cancer. I have spoken to so many patients and campaigners who are searching for that glimmer of hope on clinical trials. This desperate search takes a real toll on them, not to mention their families and carers. We will prioritise their access to specialist treatment and multidisciplinary teams, and we want to ensure that all patients with rare cancer can benefit from the best care available. We will work with charities to make sure that patients are getting the right information to manage their cancer care. We are rolling out Jess’s rule and tracking cancer diagnosed in emergency settings.