UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: Speeches

  • Emma Reynolds – 2026 Speech at the Oxford Farming Conference

    Emma Reynolds – 2026 Speech at the Oxford Farming Conference

    The speech made by Emma Reynolds, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on 8 January 2026.

    Good morning,

    It’s a real pleasure to be here at my first Oxford Farming Conference.

    This conference has a remarkable history – 90 years of new ideas being tested, challenges being confronted, and the future of British farming being shaped.

    Farmers are the custodians of 70% of England’s land and provide 65% of the food we eat.

    You are at the heart of our national life – for what you produce, the communities you sustain, and the landscapes and heritage you protect.

    I live in a rural area and I represent a rural constituency with 89 farms. So I came to this role with an understanding of the challenges you face – and the opportunities ahead.

    One of my first conversations as Secretary of State was with the NFU’s President, Tom Bradshaw. Since then, I’ve had frequent discussions with him and stakeholders from across the sector – hearing about your concerns, your frustrations, and your ambitions.

    And every one of those conversations has deepened my respect for what you do.

    For your resilience in the face of increasingly unpredictable weather and volatile markets.

    For your innovation in finding new ways to farm productively and sustainably in a changing climate.

    And for your determination to build businesses you can pass on to the next generation.

    Speaking of your determination, I also want to take this opportunity to thank farmers who have been out clearing roads and helping to protect their local communities in the recent snow.

    You step up when your communities need you and you are the heart of rural Britain.

    Today I’m going to cover a lot of ground, but there are 3 commitments that run throughout my speech.

    First, that this government is serious about partnership with your sector.

    Second, that we’re committed to giving you clarity and stability.

    Third, that we’re backing you to grow with confidence and resilience.

    Let me start with the announcement we made just before Christmas.

    Since starting this role in September, I’ve listened to farmers and stakeholders about your concerns on proposed changes to inheritance tax.

    You told me the threshold was too low. You told me it would hit small family farms – the very farms we want to protect.

    Farms that have been in families for generations. Farms you understandably want to pass on to your children.

    We have listened and we are making changes – increasing the inheritance tax threshold for Agricultural and Business Property Relief from £1 million to £2.5 million pounds.

    That means couples can pass on up to £5 million pounds without paying inheritance tax on their assets. That’s on top of the existing allowances such as the nil-rate band.

    Around 85% of estates claiming APR, including those also claiming BPR, will pay no more inheritance tax.

    Good governments listen. And when they hear real concerns, they act.

    That’s exactly what we’ve done and now we can move forward together.

    That commitment to partnership is why we asked Baroness Minette Batters to lead an independent review into farming profitability.

    We are working through all of her recommendations and we will set out a more detailed response in our 25 year Farming Roadmap, built with you, later this year.

    However, we have issued our initial, high-level response.

    She underlined the need for government to work in close partnership with the agriculture and food industry.

    I completely agree.

    So we will set up a Farming and Food Partnership Board to bring together the whole agri-food system – farmers, food processors, retailers and finance.

    Because food security isn’t just about what happens on the farm. It’s about the whole chain – from farm to fork.

    I will chair this new Board with my excellent colleague, the Farming Minister, Angela Eagle, as my deputy.

    Farmers will have a seat at the table when policy is developed. And it is your voice that will shape what government does.

    It also means that government can ask things of you – and of the wider food system.

    When we open new export markets, we need the industry ready to seize them.

    When consumers want more British produce, we need retailers committed to stocking it.

    When there’s an opportunity to grow, we need the whole system pulling in the same direction.

    That’s what partnership means. Not just listening but acting together.

    And it won’t be a one-size-fits-all approach.

    Different parts of our food system face different challenges and opportunities.

    We will develop sector plans – initially with horticulture and then with poultry. This will be followed by other sectors – where there’s real scope to grow more of our own food.

    Because when British farming thrives, consumers benefit – with affordable, high-quality food on their tables.

    Alongside creating the partnership board and sector plans, we have also announced planning reform to unlock food and farming infrastructure.

    Stepping up action on supply chain fairness.

    Bringing together farmers and financial institutions to tackle barriers to private investment.

    And dedicated trade missions to showcase British food and drink overseas.

    However, it’s not just the relationship between government and farmers that matters – it’s farmers’ relationships with one another.

    The Batters review highlights that collaboration between farmers and indeed with experts will be key to closing the productivity gap and improving farm profitability.

    So today I’m pleased to announce our new Farmer Collaboration Fund of £30 million pounds, over 3 years.

    We want to make it easier for farmers to share knowledge with each other. To make best practice common practice.

    Across the country, farmers are already coming together – sharing that best practice, managing rivers that cross boundaries, and accessing private investment that would otherwise be out of reach.

    We want to support these existing networks and help get new ones off the ground.

    Our vision is to help farmers improve their productivity and profitability; and to collaborate on delivering positive environmental change together.

    After all, the best ideas in farming don’t come from Whitehall. They come from farmers. You know your industry better than anyone else.

    There’s no such thing as a typical farm.

    A dairy farm faces different challenges to a horticultural business. A hill farmer in Cumbria operates differently to an arable farmer in East Anglia.

    Our approach must recognise this diversity.

    And nowhere is that more important than in our uplands.

    They provide over 70% of our drinking water, support rural livelihoods and are home to precious wildlife and beautiful landscapes.

    And they produce food in some of the most challenging conditions anywhere in the country.

    For too long, upland communities have faced a perfect storm. Economic fragility. Social isolation. Environmental pressures.

    We want to change that.

    Over the last year, we’ve started working with social entrepreneur Dr Hilary Cottam on a new approach.

    An approach where we get out on the ground and talk directly to upland communities.

    So today, I’m announcing that Dr Cottam and Defra will start a long-term partnership with communities in Dartmoor, then Cumbria.

    The overall vision is to develop a place-based approach for what these communities need; co-designing solutions to specific problems.

    By developing a common understanding of how land can be best used for food production and the public good.

    It’s vital we build governance that reflects the local challenges and opportunities of these areas.

    Together we will look at pooling public, private and third sector resources. Laying the foundations for new income streams. And creating the skills and networks that let communities lead their own transformation.

    That’s the most important thing here, that communities lead change from the ground up.

    During our time with upland communities, we also heard how much farmers value our Farming in Protected Landscapes programme.

    Today I’m pleased to announce we’re extending the programme for another three years – with £30 million pounds in funding next year.

    The programme has partnership at its core. It brings farmers, protected landscape organisations and communities together to deliver change at a scale no single holding could achieve alone.

    This extension means more farmers can deliver for wildlife, climate and their communities in England’s National Parks and National Landscapes.

    Productive farms at the heart of thriving rural areas.

    And that partnership approach continues with the new SFI offer launching this year.

    You’ve told me, loud and clear, that you need clarity, stability and predictability.

    I have a background in business. So I know how important margins, risk, and long-term investment are to you. Running a farm means balancing immediate pressures with decisions that will play out over decades.

    To make those decisions, you need to know where you stand.

    Protecting the environmental foundations of farming isn’t separate from profitability. It’s essential to it.

    Because without healthy land, there is no food. And without profitable farms, there are no farmers to produce it.

    Healthy soil. Clean water. Thriving pollinators. These aren’t nice to haves. They’re business fundamentals, environmental necessities and the foundations of our food security.

    And with more than 50,000 farm businesses already in environmental land management schemes, many of you clearly agree.

    But I’ve heard your frustrations. The SFI scheme became too complex. The unexpected closure last year damaged trust and confidence. And too much of the available funding was being absorbed by bigger farms.

    So we’re making three changes to fix that.

    First: we’re making it simpler and more focused.

    90% of spending currently goes on fewer than 40 of the 102 actions available.

    So we’re streamlining it. Fewer actions. Less complexity. Easier to apply.

    You’ll still have plenty of choice – but this government recognises SFI must work alongside food production not displace it.

    So we will limit how much land can be put into certain actions and review payment rates for others.

    These changes will make funding go further, allowing more people to benefit from agreements.

    Second: we’re improving fairness and accessibility.

    Right now, a quarter of the money goes to just 4% of farms.

    How can that be fair?

    We want to see farmers helping nature thrive everywhere, not just in a few places.

    So, we’re considering ways to address this such as an agreement value cap.

    This will help us meet our ambitious Environmental Improvement Plan target to double the number of farms delivering for wildlife.

    I’ve heard you say that you need planning certainty.

    I know many of you will have Environmental Land Management agreements expiring later this year.

    So I can confirm today, that we will open two SFI application windows this year.

    An initial window from June for small farms, and also those without existing Environmental Land Management agreements.

    Then a further window from September for all farms.

    Third: we’re going to provide certainty and transparency.

    From day one, I’ve heard loud and clear how important it is for you to plan for the future.

    I recognise that mistakes were made in the past, and that’s why I acted quickly – extending Countryside Stewardship Mid-Tier agreements and opening applications for the new and improved Higher-Tier offer.

    I am determined to provide you with that same stability going forward.

    So we will publish full scheme details before the first window opens and set clear budgets for each window – just like with the Capital Grants offer last year.

    There will be no more sudden unexpected closures.

    We’ll give you regular updates so you know when a window is close to being fully subscribed.

    Together, we will work with you to get the detail of these three changes right to deliver an SFI that is simpler, fairer, and more stable.

    An SFI shaped with you, that works for you.

    Once these changes are in place, the main design of SFI will be stabilised for the rest of this Parliament. So you know what to expect in the years to come.

    Because growth in farming depends upon solid environmental foundations.

    And British farming is a key growth sector – one we are backing for the long term.

    I’ve met farmers who want to build. Farmers who want to export. Farmers who want to invest in new technology.

    Too often, you’ve been held back by bureaucracy. Our government is changing that.

    I’ve heard from many of you that the planning system has stopped you building the vital infrastructure you need.

    That’s why last month, we launched a consultation on planning changes to make it easier to build on-farm reservoirs, greenhouses, polytunnels, and farm shops – so you are free to diversify, adapt and grow.

    Planning should enable ambition, not stifle it.

    But your ambitions don’t stop at the farm gate. Many of you want to reach new customers – not just here, but abroad.

    We’re opening doors to new markets by promoting British agriculture in trade deals with India, the US and Korea.

    Our deal with the EU on food standards will slash red tape and costs, improving access to the EU market.

    And our network of global agri-food attachés has unlocked export deals worth over £125 million pounds in the last year alone.

    We’re also backing the technology that will define the next generation of British farming – precision agriculture, new breeding techniques, and smarter use of data.

    And as this year’s OFC report rightly states, “farming has always evolved” and your “ability to innovate, adapt and be resilient remains your greatest asset”.

    And we will support you with that resilience.

    You know better than anyone how quickly extreme weather and disease can overturn months of work.

    That’s why we’re investing a record £10.5 billion pounds in flood defences and transforming our animal disease prevention capability through a new National Biosecurity Centre.

    The growth opportunities for British farming are significant. And we are backing you to seize them.

    So let me finish where I began.

    Partnership. We will work with you, not impose on you. Through our new Farming and Food Partnership Board. Through peer-to-peer networks. Through community-led change. And through engagement on the detailed changes to SFI.

    Clarity and stability. You will have the certainty you need to plan. Clear budgets. Clear timelines. And a clear Farming Roadmap for the future.

    Growth built on strong foundations. Trade deals that open new markets. Planning reforms that cut through barriers. Investment that backs your ambition.

    And most importantly, profitable farming and a thriving environment – not as a trade-off, but as two sides of the same coin.

    These are my commitments to you.

    The foundation for the bright future we are building together.

    That’s what modern British agriculture looks like.

    Productive. Profitable. Sustainable.

    Thank you.

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2026 Statement on Parking on Pavements

    Lilian Greenwood – 2026 Statement on Parking on Pavements

    The statement made by Lilian Greenwood, the Secretary of State for Transport, in the House of Commons on 8 January 2026.

    This statement provides the House with an update on steps the government is taking to tackle pavement parking. In short, we are giving local authorities the powers they need to address pavement parking more effectively, while ensuring consistency, clarity and fairness for all road users.

    I am today announcing the publication of the government’s response to the 2020 public consultation Pavement parking: options for change. The response demonstrates our commitment to improve transport users’ experience, ensuring that our roads and pavements are safe, reliable and inclusive.

    The government is taking forward a new, devolved approach to pavement parking, reflecting our commitment to decisions being made closer to the communities they affect. Local leaders know their communities best, so they are in the strongest position to meet local needs effectively. Our overarching objective to make pavements accessible and safe remains unchanged, but rather than introducing a ‘one size fits all’ national prohibition, which was one of the consultation options, we will instead enable local transport authorities to prohibit pavement parking across their areas at the next legislative opportunity. 

    In strategic authority (SA) areas outside London, the power will be vested in the SA as the local transport authority (LTA). In non-SA areas the power will be vested in the LTA, which is either the unitary authority or county council. This will support more responsive and inclusive transport planning in the interests of local communities.

    In the meantime, secondary legislation will be introduced in 2026 to enable local authorities to enforce against unnecessary obstruction of the pavement. This provides a practical and proportionate interim solution, allowing councils to act where pavement parking is observed by uniformed civil enforcement officers. This power will sit alongside existing traffic regulation order making powers, enabling councils to enforce pavement parking restrictions both where TROs are in place and in other areas where obstruction occurs. The department will issue statutory guidance to support local authorities in using this power.

    Taken together, these steps will give local authorities the powers they need to address pavement parking effectively and fairly in their areas, and I commend the government’s response to the House.

  • Chris Philp – 2026 Comments on Shamima Begum

    Chris Philp – 2026 Comments on Shamima Begum

    The comments made by Chris Philp, the Shadow Home Secretary, on 5 January 2026.

    Shamima Begum chose to go and support the violent Islamist extremists of Daesh, who murdered opponents, raped thousands of women and girls and threw people off buildings for being gay

    She has no place in the UK.

  • Ian Murray – 2026 Statement on the Government Cyber Action Plan

    Ian Murray – 2026 Statement on the Government Cyber Action Plan

    The statement made by Ian Murray, the Minister for Digital Government and Data, in the House of Commons on 6 January 2026.

    Today I am publishing the Government cyber action plan, which sets out how we will transform cyber-security and resilience across Government and the public sector.

    Public incidents demonstrate the devastating real-world consequences of inadequate cyber resilience. The recent incident affecting the Legal Aid Agency compromised personal data and impacted the organisation’s ability to digitally process legal aid applications and bills.

    Similarly, the attack on Synnovis—a supplier of pathology services to the NHS—caused delays to over 11,000 outpatient and elective procedure appointments and, tragically, contributed to the death of a patient.

    This reality underscores the fact that cyber-security is not a luxury; it is a fundamental component of business continuity, and all organisations should take steps to defend themselves.

    Digitisation offers substantial opportunities to transform lives, deliver better public services, and drive economic growth and digital government. By investing in secure and resilient foundations, we do more than protect and transform public services; we drive innovation and growth within the UK’s cyber-security sector.

    This Government have taken important steps in understanding and mitigating cyber risk across Government and the public sector. The Government Cyber Co-ordination Centre, also known as GC3, enables us to respond as one Government to cyber incidents, threats and vulnerabilities. Our secure-by-design approach enables us to “fix forward”, ensuring future digital services are designed to achieve cyber-security resilience outcomes. GovAssure, our cyber assurance process now entering its third year of operations, offers an unprecedented picture of current resilience levels and the fundamental blockers to progress.

    However, the evidence is clear: we must do far more to address the persistent threat. We must move from a model where individual organisations act alone to one where the Government truly defend as one.Toggle showing location ofColumn 8WS

    Today’s Government cyber action plan sets out a radically new model for how Government will operate differently to deliver this necessary transformation. It is backed by investment of over £210 million, led by the Government cyber unit within the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. The unit is taking decisive action to rapidly address the recommendations from both the National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee by holding Departments to account for their cyber-security and resilience risks, as well as providing them with more direct support and services, and co-ordinating response to fast-moving incidents.

  • Michael Shanks – 2026 Statement on Prax Lindsey Oil Refinery

    Michael Shanks – 2026 Statement on Prax Lindsey Oil Refinery

    The statement made by Michael Shanks, the Minister for Energy, in the House of Commons on 6 January 2026.

    On 30 June 2025, I made an oral statement regarding the deeply disappointing news that Prax Lindsey oil refinery had entered insolvency, and I made a written ministerial statement on 1 July 2025. I also made a written ministerial statement on 22 July 2025 providing further information on the insolvency process led by the official receiver. Today, I am updating the House on the sale of the site and the assets.

    The insolvency process at PLOR is led by the court-appointed official receiver, who must act in accordance with his statutory duties and independently of Government.

    After a thorough process to identify a buyer for the site, the official receiver has determined Phillips 66 Ltd is the most credible bidder that can provide a viable future for this site. The sale is expected to complete in the first half of 2026.

    Phillips 66 is an experienced and credible operator, and this sale allows it to quickly expand operations at its neighbouring Humber refinery, with all remaining 250 staff guaranteed employment until the end of March 2026.

    Phillips 66 plans to integrate key assets into its Humber refinery operations. This will expand Phillips 66’s ability to supply fuel to UK customers from the Humber refinery, boosting domestic energy security, securing jobs including hundreds of new construction jobs over the next five years, and driving future growth opportunities for renewable and traditional fuels.

    This agreement marks the next step in securing an industrial future for the site and the workers, who were badly let down by their former owners.

    The former owners left the company in a poor state and gave the Government very little time to act. That is why the Energy Secretary immediately demanded the Insolvency Service launch an investigation into their conduct and the circumstances surrounding insolvency. That investigation is ongoing.

  • Charlie Maynard – 2026 Speech on Tissue Freezing for Advanced Brain Cancer Treatment

    Charlie Maynard – 2026 Speech on Tissue Freezing for Advanced Brain Cancer Treatment

    The statement made by Charlie Maynard, the Liberal Democrat MP for Witney, in Westminster Hall on 7 January 2026.

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western. I thank the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Chris Evans) for securing the debate, and I thank Ellie for all her work, as well as Hugh and the others who are pushing very hard on this issue—many thanks indeed.

    I want to try to make this debate a bit broader in two directions. My sister, Georgie, also has a glioblastoma. She was diagnosed two and a half years ago and has been incredibly brave and determined, working with the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) and Ellie to try to get more brain cancer justice, and driving that debate. That also applies to many people in my constituency of Witney who have brain tumours but also tumours of all sorts of cancers.

    We ought to be considering two things. First, I ask the Minister to consider making tumour tissue freezing standard for all cancerous tumour tissues, not just brain. However close the issue is to my heart, I think it is inequitable to just focus on brain tumours. We have to try to get all tumour tissues frozen as standard, and the economies of scale mean that makes sense.

    The other thing is how we have equitable and public health-oriented access to that tissue once it is stored, which we as a country are massively failing on. I ask the Minister to consider reforming the Human Tissue Act 2004, which could be broadened in terms of what is legally permitted in research contexts. That would create explicit legal pathways for retrospective clinical samples.

    First, clinical tissue, such as biopsies and diagnostic archives, could be routinely made available for public health research under clear safeguards, without requiring separate project-by-project consent. Secondly, requirements for de-identified tissue could be simplified, clarifying that truly anonymised, non-identifiable samples can be used without consent or an HTA licence for a wider range of research, rather than just narrowly defined exceptions.

    Thirdly, licences could be converted to broader authorisations. Instead of a licence for each tissue bank, accredited biobanks could be allowed to supply samples under nationally recognised frameworks. Fourthly, DNA analysis rules could be reworked. Barriers to genomic public health research could be reduced by redefining or narrowing the offence of having tissue for DNA analysis, provided that strong data protection is ensured. That is one big chunk.

    The second big chunk I am asking for—there are only two—is that we reform the Human Tissue Act 2004 to apply a default system similar to the one we now use nationally for organ donation to tumour tissue data. To do so, Parliament would need to amend the HTA to introduce a deemed consent regime for residual tumour tissue and derived data. That would be limited to public interest cancer research, with a statutory and simple opt-out, strict purpose limits and enhanced oversight by the Human Tissue Authority.

    The model would mirror the Organ Donation (Deemed Consent) Act 2019, but apply just to data derived primarily from tumour tissue. In plain English, that means that we have something that works for organ donations and saves lives day in, day out. If any of us die, our organs are taken and our next of kin can opt out if they choose. The great majority of people do not opt out. That has meant that many more organs have been available, which has saved lives. Somebody may want to dispose of their tumour tissue, but the great majority of us do not; we would want it used for public health and science, so having it as an automatic—

    Monica Harding

    I am sorry to stop my hon. Friend mid flow, because that is a really interesting concept. I draw his attention to a BBC article from today about using centuries-old samples of tumours from bowel cancer to work out why there is such a massive increase in bowel cancer among young people. I do not understand the science of it, but surely that is a step forward for our research as well.

    Charlie Maynard

    My hon. Friend speaks to the point. Of course, those people have been dead for many centuries, but we believe it is worth being able to access that information, and at the moment it is not accessible in most cases. That is something we really want to change.

    I look to Denmark’s registry-first legal architecture, with mandatory health registries covering cancer diagnoses, pathology, genomics, and treatment and outcomes. The Danish cancer registry automatically records tumour data, covers the entire population and is used for research, oversight and quality improvement. Participation is automatic, with opt-outs rather than being consent-based. Our Government are seeking to rapidly expand our national genomics capabilities, and I applaud them for that, but without far better and more sensible access to the base tissue, with appropriate safeguards, there is no genomics-based, population-wide health service.

  • Chris Evans – 2026 Speech on Tissue Freezing for Advanced Brain Cancer Treatment

    Chris Evans – 2026 Speech on Tissue Freezing for Advanced Brain Cancer Treatment

    The speech made by Chris Evans, the Labour MP for Caerphilly, in Westminster Hall on 7 January 2026.

    I beg to move,

    That this House has considered patient access to tissue freezing for advanced brain cancer treatment, diagnostics and research.

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western—you look remarkably like the man I had breakfast with 45 minutes ago.

    I am pleased that this topic is getting the attention it deserves, and I am grateful to open this important debate, especially ahead of Less Survivable Cancers Awareness Week, which begins on 13 January. I must confess I knew relatively little about the effects of brain cancer until I met my constituent, Ellie James. Ellie has travelled from Wales today and is in the Gallery. I admire how tirelessly she has campaigned in memory of her late husband, Owain, who has brought us all here today.

    Owain passed away from glioblastoma, the most common type of malignant brain tumour in adults, in June 2024. He was just 34 years of age. Since then Ellie has been campaigning for what she calls Owain’s law to be implemented in this country. Owain was young, fit and healthy, and he had his whole life ahead of him. He leaves behind a family, including a young daughter. Owain’s story highlights the importance of informed consent from patients and their families regarding treatment and the storage of their brain tissue.

    Owain was diagnosed with a brain tumour in September 2022. Half of Owain’s 14 cm tumour was surgically removed, but only 1 cm of the removed tissue was stored fresh or flash frozen. The 1 cm was used to treat Owain with a form of immunotherapy treatment that requires the patient’s frozen tissue. Owain received three rounds of the vaccine before the frozen tissue ran out, at which point further surgery was not considered possible. The remaining 6 cm of tissue was stored in paraffin, making it unsuitable for additional vaccines.

    Owain died a few months later, despite his cancer showing signs of regression during the treatment. If all the removed tissue had been fresh frozen, around 30 vaccines could have been created. If Owain and his family had been more informed about the practices surrounding brain tissue freezing and storage, and if the hospital had chosen the flash-freezing method for all the removed tissue instead of keeping it in paraffin, Owain could still be with us. His story is truly devastating, but what most stood out to me was that there was a real, achievable potential to extend, if not save, his life.

    The amount of grief that Ellie and Owain’s family face must be tremendous and unimaginable. However, out of grief great change can take place, and I pay tribute to Ellie for her determination to turn her unimaginable grief into something positive that can help others. There is currently no consistent national guidance or sufficient infrastructure to ensure that brain tumour tissue removed during surgery can be stored in the fresh frozen state required for advanced therapies such as immunotherapy and cancer research. It is fundamentally wrong that Owain and his family learned of the small proportion of tissue initially frozen only once the vaccines ran out. I am sure they are not the only people that that will have happened to.

    For every patient diagnosed with a less survivable cancer, the average one-year survival rate is 42%. That is compared with a one-year survival rate of 70% for all cancers. Those statistics need to improve. There are procedures surrounding brain tissue freezing that can be changed, which would have an undeniably positive impact on survival rates. There are already groups doing research and drawing attention to what can be done to improve outcomes for people with cancer, such as the all-party parliamentary group on the less survivable cancers. There are also charities such as Cancer Research UK and Macmillan that conduct valuable research and support cancer patients and their families. Again, I pay tribute to them.

    There are, however, specific recommendations that I would like to mention, which link specifically to Owain and many others who face similar situations. The NHS needs an appropriate number of medical freezers to store fresh frozen tissue. In many cases, there is not enough freezer space to facilitate this type of brain tissue freezing. That must change. That long-term investment would save lives.

    Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)

    Brain cancer is one of the deadliest cancers, and it disproportionately affects young adults: it is the big cancer killer of people under 40. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that this proposal not only would save lives at a relatively small cost but has an economic benefit? The Brain Tumour Charity points out that most people diagnosed have to give up work, and so do their carers: 70% of carers also have to give up work to look after those afflicted. There is an economic benefit to doing this, at a relatively low cost, and of course it would save lives.

    Chris Evans

    The hon. Lady is absolutely right. We have to remember that a cancer diagnosis affects not just the person, but their family and loved ones. A lot of people have to leave work to care for those people, and they have to deal with the emotional impact too. Her economic point is absolutely right. The wider point is that we lead the world in life sciences. If we did what I am suggesting, we could be a world leader in brain cancer care and we could save lives too, so it is a win-win for everybody.

    As the hon. Lady said, the change is cost effective. It is estimated that it would cost £250,000 to £400,000 to ensure that all NHS trusts have the necessary capacity and capabilities for flash freezing. Every brain cancer patient should be able to access the latest treatment and research and the most accurate genome-sequencing techniques.

    In Owain’s case, there was enough freezer space, so storing his tissue in paraffin was a conscious decision not made out of necessity. That is why attitudes and established guidance protocols within the NHS about brain tissue freezing need to change. It should not be the norm to store removed brain tissue in something that makes it unusable for further research or treatment. I hope the Minister will commit to establishing national standards so that every suitable brain tumour sample is routinely frozen.

    A brain tumour can happen to anyone. It could affect us or any of our loved ones. This change needs to happen now to save lives in the future. It needs to happen for people such as Owain who are no longer with us, for people who are currently unwell with brain cancer and for people who will unfortunately become ill in the future. This Labour Government have a real opportunity to enact meaningful, positive and feasible change. We must seize that, especially if it is achievable and affordable.

    As I said earlier, we lead the world in life sciences, and brain cancer care is something that we can proudly be world leaders in. The national cancer plan, which will be published next month, must address the storage of brain tissue. Specifically, it must outline exactly how it will improve outcomes for patients with less survivable cancers. If we are serious about putting patients at the heart of cancer care, improving their awareness of the storage of their own tissue is one of the simplest places to start.

    The way that treatment is allocated is deeply unfair. The postcode lottery of cancer treatment must end. It is wrong that a person’s ability to access cancer treatment is dependent on where they live: 40% of people with cancer in the UK have struggled to access treatment or care because of where they live. That is ineffective, unfair and discriminatory. Those are not the values that a Labour Government should uphold. For the cost of a few hundred thousand pounds, we could eliminate the postcode lottery that affects brain cancer patients. We need to ensure that all types of treatment, including experimental ones involving freezers and vaccines, can succeed in all areas, not only some. That exceptionally small investment could have a lifesaving impact.

    It is not only treatment that is affected by current protocol, but research. Owain’s tissue was no longer suitable for research because it was stored in paraffin. It is also incredibly difficult for a person to have control over their own tissue post extraction. The confusion about who technically owns it makes it challenging for people such as Ellie to retrieve the remaining tissue for further testing or research. We need to stop putting unnecessary barriers in place. We are making things harder than they need to be, and these practices have a direct impact on people’s everyday lives.

    It is just as alarming that all this is done without informed consent from the patient or their families. The importance of the storage method for brain tissue cannot be overstated when someone’s life relies upon it. Brain cancer patients and their families should have an absolute right to be consulted on and to give informed consent on how their tumour is stored. While we have the opportunity to make these changes in the national cancer plan for England, we must do so. It is a small, affordable change that could have a huge impact and improve cancer treatment nationwide.

    This issue was debated in the Welsh Senedd in July, and I wonder if the Minister could liaise with the Welsh Government about introducing a similar plan. I understand that the Minister there said he was not minded to introduce legislation. Could she raise this topic with him in bilateral meetings at some point? I was also hoping to get a commitment from the Minister today to meet me and my constituent Ellie, so that Ellie can explain in detail her husband Owain’s experience and we can discuss how to prevent the same thing happening to current and future patients.

    In matters of great importance like this, patients must be aware of what is happening to their tissue during treatment and afterwards. Families should be able to access their tissue if needed for future testing and research. I urge the Minister to think of real people like Owain, Ellie and their young daughter, whose lives could be so different now if patients were consulted, if the tissue was stored differently and if there were more medical freezers. I would specifically like to know the Government’s plans regarding brain tissue freezing, given the impact it would have on diagnostics, treatment and research. Do the Government plan to invest in freezer capacity, and do they intend to make flash freezing the norm?

    While brain tumours will continue to happen to people like Owain or anyone in this room, diagnostics, treatment and research can get better. The Government can lead the way and begin to change the attitudes and practices surrounding brain tissue freezing—in fact, we must do so. I do not wish to hear another story like Owain and Ellie’s, which is absolutely tragic, and I want Ellie’s campaign to succeed; it can and must. The most devastating thing is that Owain’s outcomes could have been different if the established guidance protocol had been different. Perhaps if these things had happened, Owain could have been sitting with Ellie in the Public Gallery today.

  • John McDonnell – 2026 Comments on Alaa Abd el-Fattah

    John McDonnell – 2026 Comments on Alaa Abd el-Fattah

    The comments made by John McDonnell, the Labour MP for Hayes and Harlington, in the House of Commons on 5 January 2026.

    I was one of those MPs who campaigned hard for the release of Alaa Abd el-Fattah, so it is important, when we consider the overall process, that there is an accurate narrative. The narrative is partly this: yes, there were vile social media interventions by this person, which we all condemn, but which he apologised for. More than that, he became a campaigner in his country of Egypt—he is a joint citizen—for civil rights, civil liberties and religious freedom, and against antisemitism. For that, he served 10 years in prison. Not many in this Chamber have gone anywhere near that record of campaigning for civil liberties, so maybe that narrative could be taken into account when this individual is considered.

  • Calum Miller – 2026 Speech on Middle East and North Africa

    Calum Miller – 2026 Speech on Middle East and North Africa

    The speech made by Calum Miller, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson on Foreign Affairs, in the House of Commons on 5 January 2026.

    I thank the Minister for advance sight of his statement. I regret that the Government have presented developments in four significant states in one statement, but I will do my best to respond in the time afforded to me.

    While the attention of the world is seized by the illegal actions of the US President, it is crucial that the UK works closely with our allies to support just, lawful and humanitarian action in the middle east. After two years of widespread destruction, people in Gaza are already facing severe shortages of food, clean water and medical supplies in the midst of winter. What immediate action are the Government taking to persuade Israel to reverse its decision to bar reputable international aid agencies from Gaza and the west bank? The continued expansion of settlements on Palestinian land by Netanyahu’s extremist Cabinet since the House last met is explicitly intended to undermine any prospect of a two-state solution, so will the Government implement immediate sanctions on members of the Israeli Cabinet, and a full ban on the import of settlement goods? Will they finally publish their response to the 2024 International Court of Justice ruling that Israel’s occupation is illegal under international law?

    The Liberal Democrats condemn the violent repression of public demonstrations in Iran. The US President’s casual threats to take unilateral military action there merely serve to escalate tensions. How are our Government working with European and regional partners to co-ordinate lawful external pressure on Iran, and when will the Government commit to proscribing the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps in UK law?

    The people of Yemen desperately need peace, yet regional powers continue to intervene to support the armed factions. Will the Government review all arms export licences to Saudi Arabia and the UAE, to ensure that UK weapons are not enabling them to sustain the conflict? The UN estimates that around 24 million Yemenis desperately need food and protection. How is Toggle showing location of the UK ensuring that humanitarian aid reaches those most in need, particularly in areas where access is restricted or contested?

    The Liberal Democrats support limited multilateral strikes against Daesh in Syria to ensure the eradication of its infrastructure, and to counter its dangerous and violent ideology in the middle east. Can the Minister confirm that the Government are confident that the recent strikes were fully compliant with international law and proportionate to the threat, and what steps are the Government taking to ensure that the new Syrian Government are protecting the rights of all, including minorities and women?

    Mr Falconer

    I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for the spirit in which he asked his questions. I put so many developments into the statement because there were so many developments that I wished to update the House on at the earliest opportunity, and I wanted to provide Members with an opportunity to ask questions on any element of the statement.

    We will continue to voice our position on the vital importance of the right to assembly in Iran, and indeed the right to communication as well. We will continue to do that alongside our partners, as well as in our own voice. I am confident and can assure the House that the strikes on Syria were consistent with and compliant with international law. As I said to the shadow Foreign Secretary, we continue to raise with the Syrian Government the importance of accountability in relation to violence in Syria.

    On developments in Yemen, particularly relating to aid, there is, I am afraid, a very significant divergence between the ability of the UK to deliver aid in the areas controlled by the Houthis and the areas not controlled by the Houthis. The Houthis have continued to seize aid workers and aid premises. It is simply not possible under those circumstances to have an aid operation that operates at the scale of the needs of the Yemeni people. I again call on the Houthis, as I have done repeatedly, to release all those whom they have detained, leave those offices, and abide by humanitarian principles. If they do not, it is simply not possible for the UK, or indeed any other humanitarian actor, to ensure that the Yemenis get the support that they require.

    On arms sales, as I know the Liberal Democrat spokesperson is aware, we have the most robust arrangements in the world. I am confident that they have been followed in this case, but of course, as ever, we keep these matters under close review.

  • Priti Patel – 2026 Speech on Middle East and North Africa

    Priti Patel – 2026 Speech on Middle East and North Africa

    The speech made by Priti Patel, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, in the House of Commons on 5 January 2026.

    Britain’s place in the world matters, and the Opposition are clear about the fact that our influence should be used to its fullest effect to support efforts to combat the complex and dangerous conflicts and tensions in the middle east about which we speak all too often in the House. From Israel to Gaza, Iran, Syria and Yemen, the UK can and should be able to make a difference.

    The Opposition stand with the brave Iranians in their fight for freedom against their terrorist-supporting, despotic and oppressive Government. Their fight for freedom must prevail. What discussions are taking place with our partners in the region about the actions that can be taken to stop the regime’s cruel and barbaric acts against those who are campaigning for freedom? Iran threatens our domestic security by continuing its nuclear weapons programme, supplying weapons and drones to Russia, and backing China and its repression in Hong Kong. Britain must send it a clear signal by imposing more sanctions on it, and take action to stop the sanctions-busting that is taking place through cryptocurrencies and other methods that facilitate and bankroll this tyrannical regime. Why have the Government, and the Minister in his statement today, been silent on those specific issues, and where is the plan to keep Britain safe from Iran?

    What is being done to secure the immediate release from Iran’s cruel captivity of Lindsay and Craig Foreman, the two British nationals who, tragically, are still in captivity? I appreciate that the Minister referred to the call that took place on 19 December, but what practical measures are being taken?

    In Gaza, Hamas continue to breach the ceasefire. They have refused to release the body of the remaining Israeli hostage, Ran Gvili, which has been in terrorist captivity for more than 820 days. What pressure has been put on Hamas to adhere to the terms of the ceasefire, to disarm and to bring Ran back to his family?

    The Minister mentioned aid. Will he confirm that 4,200 trucks are delivering aid to Gaza each week in accordance with the 20-point peace plan, and that that is being overseen by the Co-ordination of Government Activities in the Territories and the Civil-Military Co-ordination Centre? Is he meeting representatives of the CMCC and COGAT to observe the operational delivery of this aid and the role that the United States is playing in securing aid delivery?

    As for the licensing of non-governmental organisations, can the Minister tell us how many agencies have undergone the licensing process and the contribution that they are making? We have heard a great deal in recent weeks and months about terrorists infiltrating aid agencies and diverting aid. What discussions has the Minister had with his Israeli counterparts about working with them to find practical solutions that will address the serious concerns that have been raised, so that more aid can get through and not be compromised by terrorists? On reforms to the Palestinian Authority, why are the Government still backing them with taxpayers’ money while they continue with the pay-to-slay programme? When will this practice stop?

    I agree with the Minister’s comments about Yemen, the conflict there, and the humanitarian suffering. Every single successive Government have worked tirelessly to secure more aid and to support global efforts to address the suffering in Yemen, but what direct discussions has the Minister had with the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, which are both long-standing partners and players, particularly on the recent dispute and tensions? Is there a bridging role that Britain can play? What planning is under way with our partners in the region to respond to further threats from the Houthis?

    On Syria, the actions targeted at Daesh were absolutely essential, but there are still many concerns about stability in Syria. When will progress be made on tackling sectarian violence, protecting minority rights and delivering democratic transition? What quantity of chemical weapons has been disposed of? What measures are being taken to stop the criminality, the gangs, the drugs and the weapons?

    Finally, on the el-Fattah case, I welcome the way in which the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has instigated its inquiry. When will the inquiry into what has happened be completed? Were the Government informed by any other Departments about the views that were expressed? I recognise what the Minister has said thus far. Will Ministers—probably now in the Home Office—pick up the case and work fast to strip Alaa Abd el-Fattah of his citizenship, as the Opposition have been requesting over the recess?

    Mr Falconer

    I can confirm that I have been in touch with my counterparts in both the UAE and Saudi Arabia, and indeed that I spoke to the Yemeni Foreign Minister this morning. We are in intensive discussions with all our partners in the region on the questions on Yemen, which are very significant. I did not speak about the Houthis, but they remain a very significant threat; I saw some of that threat during my visit to Yemen in November.

    In relation to Syria, I thank the shadow Foreign Secretary for her spirit of cross-party co-operation on the strikes that we conducted. There remain very significant outstanding questions about the security of Syria, which I am sure she and other Members of the House will have been tracking. The violence at the end of December is indeed concerning. There has been progress on a range of questions. We need follow-through on the independent reviews that were conducted into the violence, both in the coastal areas and in the south, including on accountability measures. I have made those points, as has the Foreign Secretary, directly to our Syrian counterparts.

    The shadow Foreign Secretary asks the important questions about chemical weapons. I am very pleased that an Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons programme is now engaged to ensure the destruction of chemical weapons. That will be of real interest to this House, given the extent to which chemical weapons in Syria have been discussed here, even before I was elected. That is welcome progress, and it is important for regional security.

    On Iran, the shadow Foreign Secretary is right to highlight the bravery of the protesters. I am sure that she will have seen our spokesperson’s statement over the past few days, as well as having heard the remarks that I have just made. We are, of course, speaking to our partners in the region. We are careful in the way we discuss matters in Iran. It is absolutely obvious that some in the leadership of Iran wish to portray these protests as externally animated. Of course they are not. This is a response from the Iranian people themselves.

    In relation to Mr el-Fattah and the next steps, he was—as the shadow Foreign Secretary knows well—provided with citizenship by the previous Government. That is not something that is stripped lightly. She will have heard the remarks of the Home Secretary during Home Office oral questions earlier today. As for the timeline of the review, we intend it to be swift. We want to draw a line under this matter as quickly as we can and ensure that, in all other cases, appropriate lessons are being learned.

    On aid in Gaza, I would like to be clear. We are talking about charities such as Oxfam and Save the Children—credible charities supported by the British public, who have donated generously over Christmas. There have, of course, been concerns in relation to aid in Gaza. We have ensured that wherever they have been raised, they have been investigated, but we should not let that take away from the credibility of the organisations involved. It is vital that those aid agencies be able to work; 30% of Gazans cannot afford basic food.

    The shadow Foreign Secretary is right to say that there has been an increase in aid going into Gaza, but the amount is not yet in line with what is in the 20-point plan. Fewer UN truck shipments are going in than was agreed; I think it was agreed that 250 aid trucks from the UN would go in per day, but only 147 are going in. It is welcome that commercial goods are getting into Gaza, but as I said in my statement, it is vital that lifesaving humanitarian aid—particularly tents and medicines—get in.