Author: admin

PRESS RELEASE : Sharm El-Sheikh Guidebook for Just Financing Forges a Common Path for Climate Action in Africa [November 2022]
The press release issued by COP27 on 9 November 2022.
- “Sharm El-Sheikh Guidebook for Just Financing” reduces the risk and uncertainty associated with climate investments
- The guidebook presents a realistic and implementable blueprint aimed at maximizing the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing climate finance system to drive finance to where is is needed now
Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, 10 November 2022 – The “Sharm El-Sheikh Guidebook for Just Financing” was launched during a panel discussion that took place during COP27’s Finance Day. The Guidebook aims to translate commitments into implementable projects, while capturing opportunities to leverage and catalyze needed finance and investments to support climate action.

The Ministry of International Cooperation and the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change collaborated on the “Sharm El-Sheikh Guidebook for Just Financing.” The guidebook aims to move efforts on finance beyond pledges into fostering inclusive partnerships towards a climate-resilient future.

The Panel discussion was moderated by HE Egypt Minister of International Cooperation Dr. Rania Al-Mashat and included the following speakers:
- Dr. Akinwumi Adesina, President, African Development Bank (AfDB)
- Sir Tony Blair, Executive Chairman, Tony Blair Institute for Global Change
- Mr. Ambroise Fayolle, Vice-President, European Investment Bank (EIB)
- Dr. Axel Van Trotsenburg, Managing Director of Operations, World Bank Group
- Dr. Khalida Bouzar, Assistant Secretary-General and Director of the United Nations
- Development Programme Regional Bureau for Arab State
- Mr. Emmanuel Nyirinkindi, Vice- President of Cross-Cutting solutions, IFC
- Mr. James Zhan, Director of Investment and Enterprise, UNCTAD
- Mr. Jay Collins, Vice Chairman of Banking, Capital Markets and Advisory, Citi
The Guidebook defines “Just Financing”, as financing that accounts for historical responsibility for climate change while ensuring equitable access to quality and quantity climate financing that supports resilient development pathways leaving no one behind. It sets forth 12 core principles, that serve as a framework to guide stakeholders to adopt innovative climate finance modalities and instruments. These will enable unlocking of needed financing from public and private capital providers to scale up and drive the transition required to address climate adaptation and mitigation goals.

The initiative reduces the risk and uncertainty associated with climate investments in developing countries by addressing the information gap for both national governments and investors. It also identifies key barriers to private investments and proposes solutions to overcome them. More importantly, the Guidebook maps climate capital providers based on their: access criteria, risk appetite, regional and sectoral focus, ticket size and financing instruments to address the limited access of developing countries to climate funds. It also proposes a set of innovative financing models that can leverage the unique capabilities and interests of different pools of capital to finance impactful climate projects. It was highlighted that even in many of the most challenging geographies and sectors successful projects that can be replicated and upscaled.

The COP27 Presidency said: “The Sharm El-Sheikh Guidebook for Just Financing concludes with an actionable agenda for each stakeholder that lists the roles they could play to achieve just financing outcomes. It presents a realistic and implementable blueprint aimed at maximizing the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing climate finance system in the short run, while rethinking the international architecture in the medium and long-term.”

The second segment of the panel included interventions from the following experts:
- Mr. Bo Li, Deputy Managing Director, IMF
- Dr. Mark Carney, UN Special Envoy for Climate Action and Finance, Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) / Brookfield Asset Management
- Mr. Rémy Rioux, Chief Executive Officer, AFD
- Mr. Mark Bowman, Vice President for Policy and Partnerships, EBRD
- Ms. Elizabeth Yee, Executive Vice President of Programs, Rockefeller Foundation
- Ms. Damilola Ogunbiyi, CEO, SEforALL
The Guidebook was conceptualized in September 2021 during the first edition of Egypt – International Cooperation Forum (Egypt – ICF) where developing and emerging economies underscored the dual challenge of climate change to their right to development. It also emphasized the pivotal role of the private sector in unlocking technical and financial resources at scale. The idea was further enhanced during COP26 in Glasgow with the enthusiasm around Egypt’s proposal for creating an international framework for Just Financing.
11/11/2022
PRESS RELEASE : Climate Finance Kicks off Thematic Days Agenda at COP27 [November 2022]
The press release issued by COP27 on 9 November 2022.
- Opening Session addresses “Climate Finance in a Polycrisis Era”
- Program of 26 events spotlights implementation, and just and equitable transition in Africa
- Finance Ministers reflect on commitment to climate action and financing for loss and damage
- Launch of COP27 Presidency Reducing the Cost of Sustainable Borrowing initiative
Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, 9 November 2022 – The pressing issue of climate finance kicked off COP27’s Thematic Days Agenda by reiterating it as a cornerstone for implementing climate action to save lives and livelihoods around the world.

In the first of 11 themed days at COP27, Finance Day addressed several aspects of the climate finance ecosystem, including innovative and blended finance and financial instruments, tools and policies that have the potential to enhance access, scale up finance and contribute to the transition envisaged and needed, including those related to debt for environment swaps.

“Financing underpins the development of an energy transition pathway for Africa, but the unsustainable levels of public debt countries are managing acts as a block on advancing necessary climate initiatives,” said COP27 President H.E. Sameh Shoukry.

Finance Day featured a robust program of 26 events including a Ministerial roundtable and saw the launch of the Reducing the Cost of Sustainable Borrowing initiative.

It is estimated that the world will require between $4 trillion and $7 trillion per year, to shift towards sustainable development and meet agreed Paris Agreement targets, and today’s events enabled further cooperation to help close that gap. The sessions aimed to bring together all stakeholders involved in the climate agenda – from the public and private sectors to philanthropic entities, Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) and the UN bodies, with the view to crafting an inclusive and just financing roadmap that supports the global South in implementing their adaptation and mitigation plans and renewing the commitment of developed nations to provide the necessary funding to “Leave No One Behind”.

At the opening ceremony, Egyptian Prime Minister H.E. Dr. Mostafa Madbouly, spoke to the significance of Finance Day, featuring an intensive program that included the discussion of topics that encourage the finance sector to assist the transformation to a sustainable economy and expressed hope that the conversations would be translated into serious commitments for finance adaptation. During the panel discussion, Climate Finance in a Polycrisis Era, key themes including innovative finance, financing just transition, sovereign debt for sustainability and climate change, and the role of the private sector in mobilizing resources were addressed. Private finance was highlighted as essential to deliver trillions of dollars needed to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees and ambition, action and accountability identified as critical to unlocking finance.

Access to low-cost finance was further addressed, with pragmatic solutions, deals, commitments, and pledges to reduce the cost of green loans. Discussions also involved adaptation plans and increasing the bankability and attractiveness to investors of adaptability projects.

During the day, several panels took place including:
- Mobilizing Finance for Climate Action, wherein the key takeaway was a call for the doubling of finance compared to 2019 levels in 2025 by making the commitment for developed countries to step up financing so that developing countries to be reassured that no one will be left behind.
Reducing Cost of Green Borrowing, which showcased solutions and pledges needed to reduce the cost of green loans.
- High-Level Dialogue CIF Force of Nature: Closing the Finance Gap for Nature-Based Solutions that discussed sustainable agriculture and forest management, including measures such as agroforestry that could deliver over $2 trillion annually in economic benefits, generate millions of jobs in developing countries and improve food security.
- Special Role of MDBs/Commercial Banks/Philanthropies in Climate Finance, which reaffirmed that multi-lateral development banks, in spite of institutional challenges, are by far the most effective intermediaries in mobilizing and allocating resources that will benefit the poorest countries.
The sessions provided a chance for Finance Ministers from the parties to reassert their commitments to climate action, along with a call to acknowledge and commit finance for loss and damage. The day concluded with COP27 facilitating a meeting of the heads of the African sovereign wealth funds, helping to mobilise investments and public private partnerships for increasing climate action.
11/11/2022
PRESS RELEASE : “I Depend On Your Voices” COP27 President Urges Youth To Push Government’s To Action [November 2022]
The press release issued by COP27 on 9 November 2022.
- COP President H.E. Sameh Shoukry spoke to global youth at a tour of the Children and Youth Pavillion
- The Children and Youth Pavillion is the first of its kind at a COP providing space for talks and events to enable young people to come together to push for climate action
Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, 9 November 2022 – COP27 President H.E. Sameh Shoukry today addressed crowds at the Child & Youth Pavilion at COP27 following a tour of the Pavilion.

Speaking at the Children & Youth Pavilion COP27 President H.E. Sameh Shoukry urged youth to speak out:

“I depend on your voices. It is your future that we are supposed to be here to guarantee. And it is only through your voices, your advocacy and your inspiration that you will have be able to enjoy your right to take full advantage of the earth, the forests and the air and to live a long and prosperous future on our beautiful planet once government’s undertake their responsibilities. You are the future and it is your voice that will help deliver it.”

Following his address the COP27 President received a petition from young people campaigning for loss and damage funding which following negotiations at the outset of the COP.

The first of its kind Children & Youth Pavilion provides a place for young people to engage, debate and collaborate to make their voice heard at the COP. Activity includes: initiative launches, talks and events for the under 35’s. Free meeting rooms and coffee also help young people to get together for implementation at COP27.

The Egypt COP Presidency has taken a number of steps to ensure that the youth constituency is playing a key role in COP27. Steps include: the first ever Youth Climate Pavilion and Youth-led Climate Forum, the creation of a full Young and Future Generations Day co-created and implemented with YOUNGO, and the establishment of a COP27 Presidency Youth Envoy, Dr. Omnia El Omrani.

As part of another youth initiative the Youth-led Climate Forum will be presenting key findings of a policy paper that will be introduced via two roundtables on the Young Future Generations Day on November 10 at COP27 in Sharm El-Sheikh. For the first time ever, this youth statement will find its way to the COP Presidency’s Action Agenda where youth representatives, Ministers and negotiators will discuss the expectations and the demands agreed by the youth activists.
11/11/2022
Robert Jenrick – 2022 Speech on Using the Novotel Hotel in Ipswich for Asylum Seekers

The speech made by Robert Jenrick, the Minister for Immigration, in Westminster Hall on 8 November 2022.

I am pleased to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Hollobone. Given your duties as Chair you will not be able to say so, but I know that you also feel strongly about the issue, which affects your constituents in Kettering. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich (Tom Hunt) for raising the matter, and to my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough (Paul Bristow) for supporting him. The issue clearly concerns many Members across the House and millions of people across the country. Resolving it is a first-order priority for the Government.

The ongoing legal action means it is difficult for me to comment on the specific case of the hotel in Ipswich, but I will speak about it in more general terms, and about the wider issues raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich. I know Ipswich well, and met my hon. Friend for the first time when he was standing for Parliament there, when we toured Ipswich and visited the harbour, where the hotel is. I have seen the good work that he is doing with the council and others on the town deal board to regenerate Ipswich and help it achieve its potential. It is concerning to hear that the actions of the Home Office might, in a small way, be damaging his and the community’s wider efforts to boost opportunities and prosperity in Ipswich.

Since we came into office, the initial task for me and my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary has been to resolve the very urgent situation that we found in Manston in Kent, where a large number of migrants who crossed the channel illegally in small boats were being accommodated in a temporary processing facility that was meant for a smaller number of individuals. That was not within the control of the Government. It was the result of thousands of people choosing to make that perilous journey—over 40,000 this year alone, and rising. We had to ensure that the site was operating legally and decently. As a result, we had to procure further hotels and other types of accommodation across the country at some pace. I am pleased to say that that hard work is bearing fruit, and the situation at Manston has significantly improved. The number of people being accommodated there is now back down to the level for which it was designed.

That leads to the second priority, which is to stabilise the situation more broadly, and ensure that we procure hotels in a sensible, common-sense way. The case that my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich raises prompts some important questions. First, when we choose hotels, other than in emergency situations such as the one we have been in with Manston, we need to ensure there is proper engagement with local Members of Parliament and local authorities, so that we choose hotels that might not be desirable but are none the less broadly suitable and can command a degree of public support. In some cases, we have seen hotels chosen that simply do not meet that barrier.

We need to ensure hotels are chosen against sensible, objective criteria. Those criteria might mean ensuring that towns such as Ipswich can continue to carry out their day-to-day business, and ensuring that tourists can be accommodated and that business and leisure travellers can find hotel accommodation in the centre. They will include ensuring that we take into account safeguarding concerns, for example by not choosing hotels that are next to children’s homes, schools or places where young people congregate. The criteria will certainly include taking into account community cohesion and the likelihood for disruption, and they should, obviously, include value for money for the taxpayer. On that point, I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend that we should be choosing decent but not luxurious accommodation. People coming here seeking refuge should be accommodated in simple but humane accommodation. He referenced the situation in Calais. The way this country accommodates asylum seekers vastly outweighs the way some neighbouring countries choose to do so, and I am afraid that creates an additional pull factor to the UK.

Deterrence needs to be suffused throughout our entire approach. We can be decent and humane, but we also need to apply hard-headed common sense. Once we have stabilised the present situation, and applied those criteria and better engagement methods, the third strand of our strategy is to exit from hotels altogether. Accommodating thousands of individuals in hotels costs the UK over £2 billion a year. In a time of fiscal constraints, that is an unconscionable sum of money and we need to ensure we move away from that as swiftly as we can.

The strategy that my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary and I are establishing to do that has a number of fronts. One will be ensuring fairer dispersal across the country, so that cities and larger towns do not bear a disproportionate impact of the asylum seeker issue. Secondly, it will involve looking for other sites, away from hotels, that provide better value for money for the taxpayer, which might mean more simple forms of accommodation; we hope to say more on that soon. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, we will accelerate the processing of asylum claims altogether, so that those individuals whose claims are rejected can be removed from the country swiftly and those whose claims are upheld can start working, create a new life in the UK and make an economic and broader contribution to the country.

Tom Hunt

I thank my right hon. Friend the Minister for giving way. There are a great number of Members on our Benches who think that the very act of coming here illegally should prohibit people from making an application at all. Frankly, those people have already broken the law of the land by entering illegally. There is also an issue with the definition of “refugee” and I understand our rates of granting refugee status are much higher than those of comparable European countries. Will he expand further on any work that may be done by Government to make a narrower definition of what a refugee actually is? My concern is that some people are being given refugee status who may not be refugees, if we stick to the sense of the word.

Robert Jenrick

My hon. Friend raises two important points. First, we are very concerned that a large number of individuals, certainly all those coming across in small boats, have transited through multiple safe countries before choosing to make the crossing to the UK. We do not want to be a country that attracts asylum shoppers. We want people to be seeking asylum in the first safe country that they enter. That may necessitate further changes to the law. We want to have a legal framework that is broadly based on individuals who are fleeing genuine persecution, such as war or serious human rights abuses, finding refuge in the UK through safe and legal routes, such as the highly effective resettlement schemes that we have established in recent years for, for example, Syria, Afghanistan, Ukraine and Hong Kong. My hon. Friend was right to say that his constituents in Ipswich, like millions of people across the country, broadly support that approach and have played an important role in recent months, for example by taking in refugees under the Homes for Ukraine scheme. We do not want people to be encouraged by people smugglers to cross the channel illegally and then find refuge in the UK.

The second point that my hon. Friend raises, which is equally perceptive, is that the UK’s asylum system grants asylum to a higher proportion of applicants than those of some comparable countries, such as France and Germany. The Home Secretary and I are looking at that issue in some detail to see whether we can make changes to the way we manage the process and the criteria we adopt, not so that we become a country that is unwelcoming or ungenerous—that is not the British way—but so that we do not create an additional pull factor to the UK over and above other countries that are signatories to exactly the same conventions and treaties to which the UK is party.

Tom Hunt

To be perfectly honest, I am quite keen for us to be unwelcoming towards those who have illegally entered our country. What is the difference between breaking our immigration law and breaking any other domestic law? From what I see, if someone breaks a law in the country, they get punished. Surely breaking our immigration law is breaking our law, and the people who do so should be treated as such.

Robert Jenrick

I do not want to get into a detailed conversation about our exact treaty obligations and the legal framework, but the issue is that any individual can claim asylum regardless of the means by which they came to the UK, regardless of whether they have transited through safe countries, and even regardless of whether they came from a safe country in the first place. That balance is not currently right, so we need to look carefully at how we can change it.

The most striking issue is the individuals coming from demonstrably safe countries. Today, about 30% of the individuals crossing the channel have come from Albania. That is a first-order priority for the Home Secretary and I to address, because it cannot be right that the UK provides safety and support for those individuals—mostly young men who are healthy and sufficiently prosperous to pay people traffickers, and who come from a country as safe as Albania. We need to change that. We have already returned 1,000 Albanians under the return agreement signed by the previous Home Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witham (Priti Patel). The present Home Secretary and I want to take that significantly further.

The longer-term trajectory obviously has to be moving away from tackling merely the symptoms of the problem—the processing of applications and the accommodation of individuals in expensive hotels—to tackling the root cause itself. My hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich is correct that a significant element of that will be to make further legal changes to our framework. Another element will be ensuring that deterrence is suffused through our approach so that we do not become a magnet for illegal migrants. We need the UK to be a country that supports those in genuine need, but we must not create a framework that is significantly more attractive than those of our EU neighbours.

That will also require work on the diplomatic front. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has just returned from Sharm el-Sheikh, where he had further positive conversations with President Macron and other world leaders who are dealing with the symptoms of a global migration crisis. It will require tougher action by the security services to address the criminal gangs and gain greater intelligence on their work overseas. It will include tougher action at home on employers who illegally employ migrants who do not have the right to work here.

On all those fronts, the Home Secretary and I are absolutely committed to tackling this issue. I know it is extremely important to my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich, who is one of the leading voices in Parliament on it, as is my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough. They are both simply representing the strong views of their constituents, who, like millions of people across the country, want secure borders and a fair and robust immigration and asylum system. That is exactly what the Home Secretary and I intend to deliver.

11/11/2022
Tom Hunt – 2022 Speech on Using the Novotel Hotel in Ipswich for Asylum Seekers

The speech made by Tom Hunt, the Conservative MP for Ipswich, in Westminster Hall on 8 November 2022.

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the use of Novotel Ipswich as asylum accommodation.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship for the first time, Mr Hollobone.

It is difficult for me to stress how big an issue this is in my constituency. It is something I have been aware of for some time. Before it became public, I was made aware of it as the local Member of Parliament, so that is not my complaint—I was aware of it. There is a paper trail that shows me strongly opposing the use of the Novotel for the purposes in question, and I have worked with Ipswich Borough Council on it. There are many issues on which the Labour-run council and I do not see eye to eye, but on this matter we have been on the same side.

In keeping with what many other local authorities have done, the council has, on planning grounds, secured a temporary injunction, and there will be a court hearing later today—it was meant to be yesterday. What the outcome will be I do not know. What I am saying today is less of a legal point and more of a political point on the ins and outs of whether this is the right thing to do, and I will give my views as the as the local Member of Parliament representing my constituents.

The Novotel is a town centre hotel in Ipswich. It is a good quality hotel in an incredibly important location, linking the waterfront to the Saints, which leads up to the town centre. It is an area of the town that has been at the heart of our regeneration efforts. My right hon. Friend the Minister might remember his visit to Ipswich to talk about the town deal. A significant part of the town deal is about regenerating the part of the town where the Novotel sits, and that is one of my concerns. I am already hearing stories about the way in which the building and the upkeep of it has deteriorated since it was acquired by the Home Office for this six-month period.

Paul Bristow (Peterborough) (Con)

My hon. Friend is making an important point. Does he agree that often we are talking not about budget accommodation, but about accommodating those who come over here illegally on small boat crossings in smart hotels in city and town centre locations? What sort of message does he think that sends to those living on modest incomes in the middle of a global cost of living crisis?

Tom Hunt

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. In answer to his question, I think it sends all the wrong messages. The cost to the taxpayer at a national level of putting up many illegal immigrants in hotel accommodation is huge. To say that it grates with a large number of my constituents would be an understatement. The Novotel is a nice hotel. I have been there before and my family have stayed there. I have spent time there. The issue is not in keeping with what we should be doing. My personal view is that if someone has entered this country illegally, they are not welcome and virtually all of them should be deported. But if we are going to have them staying here for a short term, it should be in basic, safe and secure accommodation, not hotels.

In addition to the Novotel with its 200 spaces in the town centre of Ipswich, there is a Best Western hotel in Copdock, which is not technically within the boundaries of Ipswich borough or my constituency, but for all intents and purposes it is within the urban area of Ipswich, so this is already causing concern for my constituents and having an impact on local public services. We are looking not just at the 200 in the Novotel, but the 150 in Copdock, so we are talking about 350 individuals who are overwhelmingly young men and who have all entered this country illegally.

Why is the Novotel the wrong location? Why is the decision to acquire the use of the Novotel for 200 individuals the wrong thing to do? Why has it united virtually everyone in the community against it? It has united the Conservative Member of Parliament, the Labour-run borough council, and the local business improvement district. It has united all sorts of people whom I do not often agree with, but we are all of one view: this is not the right location to be accommodating these individuals.

Something that I also find desperately concerning is the way in which 20 constituents of mine who worked at the hotel have been treated by Fairview Hotels (Ipswich). They were given five and a half days’ notice that their jobs were on the line, and many of them felt pressured into resigning under the vague promise that they might get their jobs back after the six-month period. I have one constituent whose daughter came home and broke down in tears because of the way she had been treated by those who manage the hotel. My responsibility is to her. My responsibility is to those 20 constituents. My responsibility is not to think about the welfare of those who have entered our country illegally, and I make no apology for that.

In terms of the economic impact of using this Novotel, a huge amount of effort is going into promoting Ipswich as a visitor destination. Ipswich is surrounded by beautiful countryside. It is the oldest town in the country—I thought it was older than Colchester anyway, but now that Colchester has city status, Ipswich is definitely the oldest town in the country. It was home to Cardinal Wolsey, and soon we will be celebrating the 550th anniversary of his birth. Only a stone’s throw away from the Novotel is Wolsey’s Gate, which was built by Cardinal Wolsey, and there is a whole operation to try to enhance the area.

What we are talking about is a 200-room, good-quality hotel in the centre of Ipswich that is lost to us and our local economy. It has been described by a business lady who runs a successful shop a stone’s throw away from the hotel as being an economic bomb that has landed on the town, and there is consensus within the business community that that is the case.

There is also the other angle: the nature of the hotel means that it is often used by successful businesses in Ipswich to host clients. If they have clients visiting or there are conferences, the Novotel is more often than not the hotel that is used, so losing those 200 beds is a further negative economic impact.

I also want to talk about community tension, which is an important point and I plan to address it directly. Ipswich is a welcoming town. It is a multicultural town and it has benefitted from that diversity. It is an integrated town. We have a history of welcoming genuine refugees—some of them are Conservative councillors, and some are from Albania—but they came here in a proper way. They came here legally, they were welcomed, and they have thrived in Ipswich. They have been welcomed in Ipswich and have made a positive contribution. The people of Ipswich are welcoming people but, quite frankly, there is a limit. When they see that people who deliberately enter our country illegally from another safe European country are being accommodated at vast expense in a good quality local hotel in an important location, which is costing local jobs and having a spill-over negative impact on the local economy, they are quite rightly furious. It is not surprising—I make no exaggeration in saying this—that at a time of cost of living strain, when many constituents are desperately concerned about getting by, I am hearing more about this than any other local issue in my postbag. I need to make the point that we are a welcoming and compassionate town.

I move on now to the general point. My right hon. Friend the Minister will know that I have been a consistent voice on the issue of illegal immigration since I was elected to this place. I support the Home Secretary fully in her efforts, and I support my right hon. Friend the Minister’s efforts fully. I was behind him in the main Chamber yesterday, supporting him. I was proud to do that, and he knows he has my support.

My view is that the situation would be even worse under Labour—there is no one from the party present. I find it somewhat ironic that the shadow Home Secretary, the right hon. Member for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper), visited Ipswich last week and commented on this matter, even though about a year ago, when she was Chair of the Home Affairs Committee, she called an urgent question to oppose the use of Napier barracks for those who have entered our country illegally. All I would say is that I would much prefer the use of disused Army barracks for these individuals, rather than good quality hotels in the centre of Ipswich. I also note that the Labour candidate for Ipswich has made multiple visits to Calais. Quite what he was doing there, I do not know, but that is by the by; I will not get distracted by that.

I will finish simply by saying that I acknowledge the fact that, in tackling illegal immigration, there is no silver bullet. I am encouraged by the Prime Minister’s meeting with President Macron yesterday, and I look forward to hearing what came out of it. I have confidence in the Prime Minister on the issue. I spoke to him, and supported him. He is a great man. But, ultimately, we have to put turbochargers under the Rwanda policy. That needs to be part of it. Sections of the left deride what happened in Australia; they say that Australia’s offshore processing approach was not successful. Everything that I have seen indicates that it was successful. The fact of the matter is that Australia had a big problem with illegal immigration, it started offshore processing, and it now no longer has a big problem. I understand that Australia had two different locations and is not using one of them, and that there might be differences between Australia and ourselves, but ultimately the principle holds. I strongly encourage my right hon. Friend the Minister not just to support the concept in principle but to stress the urgency of delivering it and of doing what is required to deliver it. He has huge support on our Benches to get this done.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough (Paul Bristow) for coming to support me today. He is also a strong voice on this matter. We do not know what will happen in court later today with the temporary injunction; I hope that it is successful. But if it is not, we must separate it from the bigger issue of how we tackle the crossings. In the short term, we are where we are now. We must look again at the use of Novotel, take on board the view of the local business community and work with and support those 20 employees. They are my constituents, and have been treated very poorly. That is all I have to say on the matter.

11/11/2022
PRESS RELEASE : UK Defence cyber skills to be boosted through industry partnership [November 2022]
The press release issued by the Ministry of Defence on 11 November 2022.
Defence personnel to be upskilled in tackling cyber threats

Industry collaboration to increase UK’s cyber resilience

Work follows National Audit Office praise for the department’s approach to conflict digitisation

The Ministry of Defence will collaborate with Immersive Labs, an industry leader in cyber resilience, to support the department’s new Digital Skills for Defence programme to build stronger digital skills, and follows a successful trial by the British Army.

Tested against industry benchmarks, the collaboration will see personnel from the Army, Royal Navy, Royal Air Force, Strategic Command and Civil Service engaged, with access to 1,600 realistic simulations and hands-on cybersecurity labs to evaluate individual and teams in decision-making against the latest threats.

As the recent National Audit Office (NAO) report on the MOD’s Digital Strategy noted, the Department is showing good practice when it comes to the challenge of modern conflict rapidly digitising, affecting Defence work and how the Armed Forces operate in the battlefield.

Minister for Defence Procurement, Alex Chalk said:

The NAO has rightly highlighted our focus on remaining at the forefront of digital capability, which is crucial as the shape of the modern battlefield continues to change at unprecedented speed.

Utilising the best technology and brightest minds in industry will only serve to bolster the rank of cyber experts focused on protecting the UK.

Exploiting digital capabilities and data is fundamental to our success in modern military operations and to the effective running of Defence. Building on the feedback from the NAO report, the department is striving to build a workforce with the digital skills it needs to deliver the digital transformation of defence.

The report acknowledged positive progress being made by the department on bringing together and aligning such digital practitioners across Defence. However, with a shortfall of homegrown talent and a very competitive market across the public and private sectors, the collaboration with Immersive Labs will also help identify cybersecurity talent to fill open roles and bolster the ranks of UK cyber experts.

Director of Functional Integration, Claire Fry said:

The Digital Skills for Defence programme is crucial in our drive to provide the right digital skills and capabilities across Defence to take advantage of the opportunity brought about by the ever-increasing pace of technological change.

Immersive Labs is one of a number of organisations we are working with to deliver training that will upskill our workforce. This will enable us to champion our One Defence Mindset and create an environment where our digital skills can flourish in a unified, connected and digitally integrated way.

MOD established the Digital Skills for Defence programme to deliver critical digital skills for Defence Leaders, Digital Professionals, and the whole Military and Civilian workforce. The programme is fundamental in building and retaining operational and business advantage. MOD’s ambition goes beyond education, seeking to transform to a learning culture where teams work collaboratively across the organisation.
11/11/2022
PRESS RELEASE : Human rights in Belarus – Joint statement to the OSCE [November 2022]

The press release issued by the Foreign Office on 11 November 2022.

Canadian Ambassador Jocelyn Kinnear stresses that the Belarusian authorities have intensified the brutal and unprecedented repression of the Belarusian people.

Mr. Chair, I am delivering this statement on behalf of Albania, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lichtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Montenegro, the Netherlands, North Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Ukraine, the United States, and my own country Canada.

Two years ago, on 5 November 2020, Professor Wolfgang Benedek presented the independent report on the human rights situation in Belarus under the OSCE’s Moscow Mechanism to the Permanent Council. The conclusions were clear: The 9 August presidential election was neither free nor fair, and “massive and systematic” violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms had been committed by the Belarusian security forces.

One year ago, on 4 November 2021, as a response to the deteriorating human rights situation and the Belarusian authorities’ failure to respond satisfactorily to the recommendations addressed to them in the Moscow Mechanism report, a group of 35 OSCE participating States invoked the Vienna (Human Dimension) Mechanism requesting information on a number of serious concerns. Unfortunately, one year later, we today note with regret that the recommendations for Belarusian authorities in the Moscow Mechanism report remain unaddressed, and our concerns for the human rights situation in Belarus are more dire than ever.

Over the past two years, the authorities in Belarus have continued their brutal and unprecedented crackdown on defenders of democracy in Belarus, including civil society and independent voices. The exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly, and association, is severely repressed, and those attempting to act on those rights and freedoms are systematically detained, abused, and subjected to other forms of intimidation and only harassment. According to credible reports, the number of political prisoners is now more than 1,350. This includes many ordinary Belarusians who simply protested in 2020; journalists, media actors, opposition figures, and human rights defenders, sentenced in some cases to well over a decade simply for exercising their fundamental rights. As a consequence, tens of thousands of Belarusians have been, and continue to be, forced to flee the country, to leave their homes and in some cases loved ones behind due to the untenable situation.

In addition, several credible, international reports have documented the continued pervasive use of torture and other ill-treatment. The Belarusian authorities have further increased harassment and intimidation efforts by widening of the scope of the death penalty to vaguely defined “attempted terrorist activities”. This is an alarming step, the real objective of which is to further increase repression against defenders of democracy. Mr. Chair, In the initial letter invoking the Vienna Mechanism on 4 November 2021, we asked for information from the Belarusian authorities on a number of concerns, including on the credible reports on continuing unjust arrests and detentions, as well as the targeting of opposition figures. The Belarusian Delegation’s reply did not acknowledge our legitimate concerns on any of these issues; for example, the Belarusian Delegation simply took exception to the term ‘political prisoner’.

The inadequate responses we have continued to receive from the Belarusian authorities, combined with the deteriorating developments we have witnessed over the past year, clearly demonstrate there is no change in approach by the Belarusian authorities.

On the contrary, in recent months, the Belarusian authorities have intensified the brutal and unprecedented repression of the Belarusian people, and has on top of that been facilitating Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine in violation of international law.

Mr. Chair,

Even as the human rights situation in Belarus has continued to deteriorate, the Belarusian Delegation has often claimed to seek dialogue on these issues here in the Permanent Council. The Vienna Mechanism is a tool for such dialogue, but it requires the Belarusian authorities to engage substantially, realistically and honestly on the subject. It requires the Belarusian authorities to recognise our legitimate continuing concerns, which mirrors those of civil society, independent media, and human rights defenders.

Against this backdrop, we repeat our questions raised under the OSCE Vienna Mechanism in the Permanent Council. We encourage the Belarusian authorities to consider these questions carefully and to provide genuine answers to this Council, including a detailed explanation of their reactions to the recommendations contained in the 5 November 2020 report under the OSCE Moscow Mechanism.

Finally, we call for the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners in Belarus. We urge the Belarusian authorities to fully implement their international obligations and OSCE commitments, and to make use of the OSCE’s tools and mechanisms to help resolve the continuing human rights crisis.

Thank you.

11/11/2022
Helen Whately – 2022 Speech on Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month

The speech made by Helen Whately, the Minister of State at the Department for Health and Social Care, in the House of Commons on 8 November 2022.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) on securing this important debate, and for his work as chair of the APPG on pancreatic cancer. He is right: we should talk about pancreatic cancer; we should talk about how to improve survival rates and diagnosis rates; and we should talk about how we can raise awareness of pancreatic cancer. As we do so—including in this very debate—that in itself will make a difference, and if we do not debate this now, during Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month, then when? I believe in seizing the moment.

I welcome the speeches from the hon. Members for Strangford, for East Dunbartonshire (Amy Callaghan) and for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart) and my hon. Friends the Members for Stroud (Siobhan Baillie) and for Carshalton and Wallington (Elliot Colburn), who also seized this moment to speak about pancreatic cancer. The hon. Member for Strangford spoke movingly about Rebecca Buggs, whose children were just eight and nine years old at the time she had surgery. I am very glad that because she was diagnosed early, she was able to have surgery, but we know that, sadly, her experience is the exception not the rule.

The hon. Member spoke about the importance of raising awareness of symptoms such as stomach and back pain, indigestion, unexplained weight loss and jaundice, and the importance of getting those symptoms checked if there is no explanation. He also spoke about research as the key to earlier diagnosis. On one of his questions, I will answer straightaway that, yes, I would be delighted to join him for a meeting with Pancreatic Cancer UK. I will come to his other questions as I go through my speech.

My hon. Friend the Member for Stroud mentioned that she wants to help everybody and, knowing her well as a colleague, I know that that is absolutely true. She also mentioned the catchphrase, “The clue is in the loo,” as mentioned by other hon. Members. She spoke movingly about one of her constituents, a young woman who spent five years going to and from her GP with symptoms, including fatigue and bloating, which brought to life how hard this cancer is to detect. She also talked about the PERT treatment, which I will come to in a moment.

It is very good to see the hon. Member for East Dunbartonshire, a former chair of the APPG, here and to hear her speaking so eloquently in this debate. She spoke about Barbara, a PE teacher, and about the healthy life she lived. Barbara went many times to get a diagnosis, but it took almost 18 months to get one. Again, sadly, that brought to life how hard this cancer is to detect.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington for acknowledging the work that the Government have done, particularly on raising awareness for pancreatic cancer. He talked about the importance of the workforce, which I will come to. He also asked me to visit the Royal Marsden, of which he is rightly proud, and which I would be delighted to do.

The hon. Member for Upper Bann spoke about the importance of access to GPs. She called for more funding into research, and said, rightly, that time matters.

I will come to many of the points that hon. Members have raised, but first, I believe in saying it as it is. Nearly 10,000 people a year are diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, and that figure has steadily increased since 2013. Diagnosis rates increase with age, and from the mid-40s onwards pancreatic cancer is more common in men than in women. Just under a quarter of pancreatic cancers are diagnosed at an early stage, so three quarters are not. About 40% of diagnoses follow an emergency presentation. The one-year survival rate is just 27% and the five-year survival rate is only 7.8%. Although those figures have improved in the past 10 years, they are still bleak for anyone who receives a diagnosis and for their loved ones. That is why it is right to talk about pancreatic cancer.

As with many other cancers, early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer is crucial so that there is the opportunity for successful treatment. One of the Government’s healthcare priorities is to improve early diagnosis of all cancers, and to achieve 75% diagnosis at stage 1 or stage 2 by 2028, compared with the current rate of about 50%. We have opened 91 community diagnostic centres, which have carried out 2 million extra scans, tests and checks, including cancer tests. We are rolling out non-specific symptom pathways so that people with symptoms such as weight loss or fatigue are either diagnosed or have cancer ruled out. We are encouraging people to go and get their symptoms checked. The NHS’s “Help Us, Help You” campaign tackles the barriers that prevent some people from getting their symptoms checked, such as fear about what might be found.

The hon. Member for Enfield North (Feryal Clark) talked about waiting times, and I assure her that we are tackling them. This August, more than 19,000 patients saw an upper gastrointestinal specialist, compared with 17,600 last August, and 17% more patients have seen a specialist within the two-week performance standard. That said, I recognise that the NHS is still not hitting the standard for enough people—it is currently 83%, compared with the 93% standard—so we will continue to support the NHS’s efforts to tackle waiting lists and backlogs.

On treatment, credit is due to hard-working NHS staff who have increased cancer treatment levels to 107%, compared with pre-pandemic levels. The cancer drugs fund has helped more than 80,000 patients, and we are investing £5.4 million in five new national clinical audits of cancer, one of which is focused on pancreatic cancer.

As several hon. Members said, the key to making a big leap forward in survival rates for diseases such as pancreatic cancer is research—research into tests that will achieve earlier diagnosis and research into treatments. The Government spend £1 billion a year on health research through the National Institute for Health and Care Research. The NIHR has funded seven research projects for pancreatic cancer since 2019, with a committed spend of about £3.6 million. That is about 5% of the NIHR’s total funding for cancer research, which is over £73.5 million.

Jim Shannon

I referred to the fact that Pancreatic Cancer UK has raised £10 million for research every year, and one of its requests is that the Government match that. I thank the Government very much for the £3.6 million that is going to pancreatic cancer, but is it possible for that extra bit of effort to be made and for the Government to match the charity’s £10 million? I do not want to put the Minister on the spot, but I really do think that is an important issue.

Helen Whately

I absolutely hear the hon. Gentleman’s request, which is for match funding for the funding contributed by Pancreatic Cancer UK. I will say two things about that. Another function of the NIHR is to support research where the funding comes from other organisations; it already does that. In fact, it has supported 70 pancreatic cancer-related studies that have been funded by others.

The other point, which the hon. Gentleman may be aware of, is that the NIHR does not actually ringfence funding for specific diseases. That is similar to his match funding point. The NIHR is ready to fund research. It looks at applications for funding from the research community and then allocates that funding by looking at the merits of the proposal. We should encourage more bids for funding for pancreatic cancer research and more bids to go into the NIHR, which would then enable it to allocate more funding. I am assured the NIHR stands ready to fund pancreatic cancer research; it is about getting those applications in to carry out that research. I could publish a highlight notice to flag to the research community the importance of pancreatic cancer, which may go some way to achieving what the hon. Gentleman seeks.

My hon. Friend the Member for Stroud spoke about PERT and asked why it is not prescribed for more people. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline NG85 recommends that PERT be offered to patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer, and NICE includes PERT in its quality standard for pancreatic cancer. NICE guidelines do not replace clinical judgment. They are not mandatory; they are guidelines. However, it is clear that PERT should be discussed between a doctor and a patient so a clinical decision can be made. I heard what my hon. Friend called for and I will look into whether there is evidence that such discussions between doctor and patient are not happening.

My hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington spoke about the importance of the workforce and, as the daughter of two NHS doctors and a former Minister for the NHS workforce, I agree with him. In essence, the NHS is its workforce, and I am proud that we are on track to achieve our ambition of 50,000 more nurses. Talking specifically about the cancer workforce, the workforce plan published in 2017 set an ambition to increase the workforce by 1,500 full-time equivalents by 2021. That has been achieved and, in fact, exceeded by 226 staff members.

Since then, Health Education England has been taking forward the priorities in the cancer workforce plan, with an additional £50 million of funding in the last financial year and this one. Also, a significant proportion of the elective recovery funding—£8 billion in the next two years—will be spent on workforce, both on capacity and skills. I assure my hon. Friend that, as the Minister with oversight of cancer care, I will look carefully at whether we have the necessary workforce coming on track now and in the future to achieve our ambitions and aspirations for cancer care.

The hon. Member for Strangford and several others asked about the 10-year cancer plan, and I know hon. Members are keen to hear about progress. More than 5,000 individuals and organisations responded to the Government’s call for evidence. The Government are considering the responses and the next steps, so I may have to disappoint some colleagues who may want to know more, because that is as far as I will go today. I assure hon. Members that I know how strongly they and their constituents feel about the matter.

I have welcomed this debate as a chance to talk about all the work going on to improve cancer diagnosis, treatment and survival rates, and crucially, to talk specifically about pancreatic cancer. Not least because raising awareness of pancreatic cancer is, in itself, an important step towards improving people’s chances of survival, raising awareness of the symptoms and, in turn, encouraging people to contact their GP and get themselves checked. I pay tribute to everyone involved in Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month, particularly to Pancreatic Cancer UK and to everyone taking part, whether that is walking 30 km this month or doing their own thing to raise funds and awareness. I thank them all for what they are doing. In turn, I will do what I can in Government to support all those efforts and to improve the chances for anyone suffering from pancreatic cancer.

11/11/2022
Feryal Clark – 2022 Speech on Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month

The speech made by Feryal Clark, the Labour MP for Enfield North, in the House of Commons on 8 November 2022.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Hollobone. I start by thanking and paying tribute to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for securing this morning’s debate to mark Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month.

As other Members have done, I pay tribute to the brilliant work of Pancreatic Cancer UK. Such organisations are vital in raising awareness of this awful disease. I also praise the important contributions made by all Members, and thank them especially for sharing the touching stories of their constituents.

As we have heard throughout the debate, pancreatic cancer is the deadliest of the common cancers. It affects about 10,000 people a year across the UK, with three in five of those being diagnosed at a very late stage. More than half of those people will die within three months of diagnosis, only 7% will survive for more than five years, and 5% will survive for 10 years or longer. The figures are even worse in Northern Ireland, as we have heard.

In the North Central London integrated care board area, within which my constituency of Enfield North falls, 161 people were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in 2020, and there were 153 deaths due to pancreatic cancer, so I sympathise profoundly with anyone who is affected by pancreatic cancer and with the family members of those who are suffering. Those statistics are shocking, but even more shocking is the fact that they have barely changed in the past 50 years, and that the UK ranks 29th of 33 countries with comparable data on five-year survival for people with pancreatic cancer.

One reason for the tragically low survival rates is the stage at which people are diagnosed, as was mentioned by the hon. Members for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell), for East Dunbartonshire (Amy Callaghan) and for Strangford, and other Members who contributed. Only 16% of people with pancreatic cancer are diagnosed at an early stage. For many, it is simply too late, so I would be grateful if the Minister outlined how the Government intend to improve the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer.

One thing we cannot ignore is the cancer backlog. Over the past decade, pancreatic cancer mortality rates have increased by a fifth. Waiting lists have risen to record levels and the proportion of people waiting less than 18 weeks for treatment is at its lowest in a decade. At the end of July 2020, waiting lists had risen to a record 6.8 million people, with almost 400,000 patients waiting more than a year. The Government are missing their target to eradicate the two-year wait, and analysis produced in May by Macmillan found that it could take more than five years to clear England’s cancer treatment backlog. For pancreatic cancer patients, that is simply not good enough. They cannot afford to wait.

Many Members have spoken about the workforce element, which underpins all the issues outlined in the debate. As was eloquently described by the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Elliot Colburn), without a robust workforce strategy, our NHS will simply not be in a place to provide the support that pancreatic cancer patients need, yet Ministers continue to ignore those calls—even calls from their own Chancellor, who is the former Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee. A recent report by the Committee said that the absence of a “serious effort” from the Government to tackle gaps in the cancer workforce is jeopardising earlier diagnosis, so I am keen to hear from the Minister what plans the Government have to ensure that staff are trained and retained sustainably, such that pancreatic cancer patients can always access care in a timely manner.

Labour has already set out its plans, pledging the biggest expansion of medical school places in history to give the NHS the doctors it needs so that patients can be seen on time. That commitment also includes creating 10,000 new nursing placements every year and training 5,000 new health visitors. Labour will also produce a long-term workforce plan for the NHS for the next five, 10 and 15 years to ensure that we do not find ourselves in this position again.

Members also mentioned the 10-year cancer plan. In February, the then Health Secretary announced a new war on cancer and launched a call for evidence to inform a new 10-year cancer plan for England. That call for evidence closed in April. We are now on our fourth Health Secretary since April, but there is still no sign of the plan. That is not good enough not just for those suffering with pancreatic cancer, but for those with all forms of cancer. Will the Minister set out exactly when we can expect this cancer plan? As we emerge from the pandemic, people living with pancreatic cancer need an NHS that has the time and resources to support them. It is about time that the Government delivered on that.

11/11/2022
Steven Bonnar – 2022 Speech on Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month

The speech made by Steven Bonnar, the SNP MP for Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill, in the House of Commons on 8 November 2022.

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mr Hollobone. I congratulate the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) on securing this debate on Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month and setting out matters in such great detail for us. We have heard from hon. Members about a wide range of issues faced by constituents across the nations of the UK in dealing with this type of cancer. The hon. Member for Stroud (Siobhan Baillie) spoke of how well informed her constituents are and the asks they have of the Government in this area. My hon. Friend the Member for East Dunbartonshire (Amy Callaghan) spoke of her constituent Barbara and her experience of NHS services failing to identify and diagnose her cancer in time. We also heard from the hon. Members for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell), for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart) and for Carshalton and Wallington (Elliot Colburn), and I thank all Members for their contributions.

November is Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month and 17 November is World Pancreatic Cancer Day 2022. It is so important to raise awareness through these days and through our debates to improve early diagnosis by ensuring that more people know the early symptoms of pancreatic cancer. It has the lowest survival rate of all common cancers and is the deadliest common cancer in Scotland and across the United Kingdom. There are around 10,500 new cases in the UK each year. That equates to 29 cases every single day. It is the 10th most common cancer in the United Kingdom, accounting for 3% of all new cases, and the fifth biggest cancer killer with 9,000 deaths each year. In Scotland, there are around 900 new cases per year, with an incidence rate of 15.5 per 100,000 people.

Pancreatic cancer is caused by the abnormal and uncontrolled growth of cells in the pancreas—a large gland that is part of our digestive system. In the early stages, a tumour in the pancreas does not cause any symptoms, which can make it difficult to diagnose, as we have heard. Symptoms can vary from person to person and may include jaundice, indigestion, stomach or gut pain, back pain, diarrhoea, constipation or weight loss. Pancreatic cancer is particularly difficult to diagnose early, as we have heard so many times, and Pancreatic Cancer UK reports that 80% of cancer patients are not diagnosed until the cancer is at an advanced stage. While the causes are not clear, it is most common among those aged 75 years and over, with almost half of all new cases diagnosed falling in that age demographic.

Early diagnosis is crucial to improving survival outcomes, with one year survival rates for those diagnosed at an early stage being six times higher than those diagnosed at stage 4. However, most people with pancreatic cancer are unfortunately diagnosed at that late stage. At present, surgery is the only treatment with curative intent for pancreatic cancer, while chemotherapy and radiotherapy have been shown to improve survival in those with late- stage pancreatic cancer. If it is diagnosed at a late stage, surgery to remove the cancer is usually not possible.

The Scottish Government are committed to diagnosing cancer as early as possible, which is why they continue to invest in their detect cancer early programme, or DCE, and are rolling out rapid cancer diagnostic services across Scotland. We know the earlier that cancer is diagnosed, the easier it is to treat. That is why the Scottish Government continue to invest in that programme, which adopts a whole-system approach to diagnose and treat cancer as early as possible. They are developing a new plan for early diagnosis as part of their new cancer strategy to be put in place in spring.

The new 10-year strategy will take a comprehensive approach to improving patient pathways from prevention and diagnosis through to treatment and post-treatment care. That follows on from the establishment of three rapid diagnostic services centres, developed within the NHS infrastructure. The centres are in Ayrshire and Arran, Dumfries and Galloway, and Fife. They will play a key role in delivering early diagnosis and improved care, with fast-track diagnostic testing at the first appointment wherever possible.

The First Minister announced as recently as 10 October that the next two rapid cancer diagnostic services centres in NHS Scotland will go live in my own NHS board of NHS Lanarkshire and in NHS Borders. Through the NHS recovery plan, the Government in Holyrood have invested £29 million to provide an increase of 70,000 diagnostic procedures next year and 90,000 by the end of the plan in 2026. A new DCE awareness campaign is also under development to empower people with possible cancer symptoms to act early. That is due to be published in spring 2023.

In Scotland, it has been recognised that the impact of the covid-19 pandemic may have exacerbated inequalities within cancer screening, and the Scottish Government have committed up to £2.45 million to the screening inequalities fund over the past two years. Public awareness campaigns and messages have run throughout the pandemic to encourage those with possible cancer symptoms to seek help. To support scope-based diagnostics, the Scottish Government have published a £70 million endoscopy and urology diagnostic recovery and renewal plan, focusing on key areas such as balancing demand and capacity, optimising clinical pathways, improving quality and efficiency, workforce training and development, and infrastructure and innovation redesign. A further £9 million has been allocated this financial year to support diagnostic imaging capacity, with six mobile MRI scanners and five CT scanners in place across Scotland’s NHS.

Despite all that work and all the amazing work of charities and activist organisations, and their dedicated supporters, which has been placed on the record today, there is still so much more for us to do. Investment in facilities, improved treatment options and early detection are all necessary, but it is also vital that research into alternative cancer treatments continues and expands. The Scottish Government provided an average of £2 million each year to cancer research causes in the five years before the pandemic, and that remains our priority.

According to Pancreatic Cancer UK, research into the disease has been underfunded for decades. The charity estimates that pancreatic cancer receives 1.4% of cancer research funding and yet is the fifth biggest cancer killer. Just recently, to mark World Cancer Day, Cancer Research UK delivered a cash injection of £12 million to the Cancer Research UK Scotland centre, supporting the work of cancer researchers from the University of Edinburgh and the University of Glasgow. Professor Ian Tomlinson, who is co-director of the centre, welcomed the finance but highlighted how challenging the previous year had been and the fact that covid-19 has slowed down research.

Finally, we in the SNP commend all the charities and activist organisations and their dedicated supporters for their tireless efforts to raise awareness of pancreatic cancer. We have called on the UK Government to support Cancer Research UK and other research charities throughout the pandemic, while their funding activities have been curtailed by restrictions, and now in the face of people being more cautious with their money. With the Tory cost of living crisis continuing to undermine people’s financial security and their ability to support charitable efforts, it is more important than ever for the Government to step in and support charities in their work and to directly fund cancer research.

11/11/2022