Tag: Siobhain McDonagh

  • Siobhain McDonagh – 2023 Speech on Brain Tumour Research Funding

    Siobhain McDonagh – 2023 Speech on Brain Tumour Research Funding

    The speech made by Siobhain McDonagh, the Labour MP for Mitcham and Morden, in the House of Commons on 9 March 2023.

    I crave the indulgence of the House for the speech that I am about to make.

    On 27 November 2021, my beautiful, unique, tough, resilient, successful sister collapsed in front of me and had a series of fits. Five hours later, in University College Hospital, two doctors named Henry told me that they suspected that she had a brain tumour, but as this was the NHS, MRI scans were not done at the weekend, so they could not confirm their diagnosis. On Wednesday, when I stepped on to her ward, she demanded—and everybody here who knows her will be able to hear her say it—that I ask the ward doctor to come and speak to her. She said, “It’s bad, Siobhain, because he can’t look at me.” And it was.

    For the woman who had run Labour’s only two consecutive successful general election campaigns, and achieved her ultimate ambition to see two full-term Labour Governments, the diagnosis was of a glioblastoma. All her toughness evaporated, and there was my little sister with a diagnosis that meant that she might have nine months left—a condition for which there was no cure, for which treatment had not made progress in over 30 years. Just before Christmas, she had the tumours removed by two amazing female surgeons, Róisín Finn and Anna Miserocchi at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, but this was post Brexit, so there were not enough nurses to keep all the operating theatres open, and Margaret’s operation was cancelled three times. I leave it to Members to guess my reaction to that, and how we got that operation in the end.

    The best piece of advice I have ever received in my life, and I have received many bits of good advice, was from the clinical nurse specialist. When we asked her where Margaret should go for post-operative treatment— St George’s, down the road from where we live; the Royal Marsden, around the corner; or to stay at University College—Róisín said, “We have Professor Paul Mulholland, and he is the best. He is the best in the UK, and he is the best in Europe.” I want to confirm to the House that he is the best. He is why Margaret is still alive.

    What you get when you have your tumour removed, if you live that long—many people do not—is six weeks’ radiotherapy, followed by six months’ chemotherapy with a drug called temozolomide. That drug was introduced in 2005, and since then there have been no variations to the gold-standard treatment in our NHS, so when you read articles such as the one in The Times on Monday, telling us all how successful cancer treatment in the UK is—how 85% of people with a breast cancer diagnosis, 55% of people with a bowel cancer diagnosis, and 98% of people with a prostate cancer diagnosis will get to live for 10 years—do not believe that it is the same for brain cancer. The Times may have chosen a brain as the photograph for the top of the article, but those statistics do not apply.

    Margaret had her treatment in early new year 2022; like so many, she could not go through with it—the treatment would have killed her. At that point, where do you go? There were no alternatives. It is not that there are a few trials: there are no trials, and there is nowhere to go. So, like so many of us who are lucky enough to have friends and family and access to money, we looked to the private sector and international travel. Margaret has been on a course of treatment with nivolumab, a Bristol Myers Squibb drug that was seen to be unsuccessful in the treatment of brain cancer, and Avastin, and has been going monthly to Düsseldorf, Germany for four days. That might seem an easy thing to do, but taking a seriously ill person on an aeroplane to a hotel, with no access to healthcare and no emergency services, would be foolhardy unless there was nothing else in this country. There was, and is, nothing.

    The help that we received from Dr Sahinbas and his wife, who runs their small clinic in Germany, with hyperthermic treatment was amazing. Their kindness was overwhelming, but there were times when I thought that I would not be able to get Margaret on the plane—that somebody would stop her because she was so unwell. There was one night when I stayed and stared at her, because I did not think she was going to make it through the night, and how would I explain that to anybody?

    By June 2022, Margaret had a scan, and they could not see the tumour. When I asked Dr Mulholland, “Is this normal for this treatment?”, he said, “Normal? I have never tried this on anybody before.” Nobody has ever had this drug so early in their treatment or at the quantity that Margaret has had it, or at the same time as hyperthermia therapy. Those who know about Margaret’s experience have come to me and sought support from Dr Mulholland because there is nothing else. The number that the NHS is currently forsaking and, for the lucky people who can get the funds to do it, abandoning to international travel is nothing short of a complete and utter national scandal. I wonder what my mum who came here in 1947 to train as part of the first generation of NHS nurses from Ireland would say about the NHS abandoning her daughter.

    But things can be different. Things can be better—maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, maybe not next year, and maybe not within Margaret’s lifetime—and they can be different if we want them to be different. I ask the Minister to please not give the NHS or the cancer research charities any more money until they guarantee that at least 200 sufferers every year get access to a trial—that would be 1,000 patients over the lifetime of a Parliament—because with those trials we can begin to understand what works and what does not.

    The Minister should give no more money to the NHS trainers until they commit that every young doctor training to be a medical oncologist has to go through a course on brain tumour. At the moment, there is no compulsory training. The reason why there is nobody on those wards and nobody doing the work is that we are training nobody, and we are training nobody because nobody is required to do the course, and it was like that 15 years ago with melanoma. Some 15 years ago, the survival rates were so poor, but somebody came up with the idea that immunotherapy would be successful, and today we see successful survival rates equivalent to the best in any discipline. We also see young doctors wanting to take on the specialism, because it is exciting, there is hope, there is a future and there are alternatives.

    Who in their right mind today would become a medical oncologist in glioblastoma? There is no hope, no future, no trials—nothing. It would have to be someone with the belligerence and tenacity of my sister Margaret, and we have found that person in Paul Mulholland, but there needs to be more Pauls and more determination. We must have access to trials for 200 people and the training of medical oncologists, and we must require the pharmaceutical industry—because we will make no progress without it—to trial every drug that gets licensed to deal with tumours on those with brain tumours, so that there is access to existing drugs that can be repurposed.

    I am sorry about the time I have taken for this speech, but I want to tell the House that when I go to bed tonight I will keep my ear open for Margaret to hear her call my name, I will get up and I will go into her room, and it may be that she is asleep and I have imagined that she has called me. I accept that. That is my duty. It is what I have learned from my family, from my faith and from my politics. I accept that. That is my duty. It is what I have learned from my family, what I have learned from my faith, and what I have learned from my politics. I accept my responsibility. All that I want is for the NHS, cancer research charities, and pharmaceutical companies to stand up and accept their responsibility, and give some hope to the 3,200 people who will be diagnosed with a glioblastoma this year.

  • Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Siobhain McDonagh on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the average waiting time for an outpatient paediatric ophthalmology appointment was in 2014-15.

    Alistair Burt

    The information is shown in the following table.

    Information on outpatient paediatric ophthalmology appointments in 2014-15

    Median waiting time in days for a first appointment1

    53 days

    Number of appointments that were cancelled by the hospital

    36,533

    Number of appointments that were cancelled by the patient

    33,448

    Number of appointments that the patient did not attend

    65,436

    National average unit cost of a first appointment2

    £118

    Sources:

    Hospital episode statistics, Health and Social Care Information Centre

    Reference costs, Department of Health

    Notes:

    1Waiting time is defined as the time in days between the date the referral request was received and the date of the first appointment, whether it was attended or not.

    2Defined as a consultant-led single-professional first appointment. Separate data are collected are collected on non-consultant-led, multi-professional, and follow-up appointments.

  • Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Siobhain McDonagh on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many outpatient paediatric ophthalmology appointments were (a) cancelled and (b) missed because the patient did not attend in 2014-15.

    Alistair Burt

    The information is shown in the following table.

    Information on outpatient paediatric ophthalmology appointments in 2014-15

    Median waiting time in days for a first appointment1

    53 days

    Number of appointments that were cancelled by the hospital

    36,533

    Number of appointments that were cancelled by the patient

    33,448

    Number of appointments that the patient did not attend

    65,436

    National average unit cost of a first appointment2

    £118

    Sources:

    Hospital episode statistics, Health and Social Care Information Centre

    Reference costs, Department of Health

    Notes:

    1Waiting time is defined as the time in days between the date the referral request was received and the date of the first appointment, whether it was attended or not.

    2Defined as a consultant-led single-professional first appointment. Separate data are collected are collected on non-consultant-led, multi-professional, and follow-up appointments.

  • Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Siobhain McDonagh on 2016-02-22.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what the average unit cost of a first outpatient paediatric ophthalmology appointment was in 2014-15.

    Alistair Burt

    The information is shown in the following table.

    Information on outpatient paediatric ophthalmology appointments in 2014-15

    Median waiting time in days for a first appointment1

    53 days

    Number of appointments that were cancelled by the hospital

    36,533

    Number of appointments that were cancelled by the patient

    33,448

    Number of appointments that the patient did not attend

    65,436

    National average unit cost of a first appointment2

    £118

    Sources:

    Hospital episode statistics, Health and Social Care Information Centre

    Reference costs, Department of Health

    Notes:

    1Waiting time is defined as the time in days between the date the referral request was received and the date of the first appointment, whether it was attended or not.

    2Defined as a consultant-led single-professional first appointment. Separate data are collected are collected on non-consultant-led, multi-professional, and follow-up appointments.

  • Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Siobhain McDonagh on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department takes to prevent people using a false identity being granted entry clearance to the UK.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Home Office does not hold the specific information in relation to people from Pakistan using false identity, in the format requested. To obtain it would involve interrogating individual case records, at disproportionate cost.

    All out of country entry clearance applications are subject to an extensive range of mandatory and discretionary checks.

    These include, but are not limited to, identity, travel document verification, searches against national and international police records and against previous Immigration history.

  • Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Siobhain McDonagh on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department took to assess the grounds for granting a visa to Mufti Hanif Qureshi.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    All visa applications are considered on their individual merits and in line with the Immigration Rules.

    In order to safeguard an individual’s personal information and comply with the Data Protection Act 1998 the Home Office is limited in what information it can provide when the request is made by someone who is not the applicant. The Home Office is therefore unable to provide the information requested.

  • Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Siobhain McDonagh on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many times her Department has been made aware of people from Pakistan using a false identity to obtain entry clearance to the UK in the last five years.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Home Office does not hold the specific information in relation to people from Pakistan using false identity, in the format requested. To obtain it would involve interrogating individual case records, at disproportionate cost.

    All out of country entry clearance applications are subject to an extensive range of mandatory and discretionary checks.

    These include, but are not limited to, identity, travel document verification, searches against national and international police records and against previous Immigration history.

  • Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Siobhain McDonagh on 2016-09-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many Urdu speakers are employed at the (a) Home Office in Marsham Street, London and (b) British High Commission in Islamabad to investigate the background of people applying for entry clearance.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    There are no Urdu speakers employed by the Home Office in Marsham Street involved in processing Entry Clearance, as entry clearance applications are not considered at that location. There are 11 Urdu speaking staff employed at the British High Commission in Islamabad and seven at the British embassy in Abu Dhabi involved in the processing of visa applications, including investigating the background of people applying for entry clearance.

    Under our ‘hub and spoke’ arrangements, applications lodged in Pakistan for settlement, applications under the Points Based System, and EEA applications are processed at the Visa section in Sheffield. Applications lodged in Pakistan for visits are processed in Abu Dhabi. The British High Commission in Islamabad processes Official applications made in-house.

  • Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Siobhain McDonagh – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Siobhain McDonagh on 2016-09-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment her Department has made of the potential effect on community cohesion of the presence of (a) Mufti Hanif Qureshi, (b) Muhammad Naquib ur Rehman and (c) Hassan Haseeb ur Rehman in the UK in 2016.

    Sarah Newton

    The Home Office does not routinely comment on assessments of foreign visitors to the UK.

  • Siobhain McDonagh – 2022 Speech on Sri Lanka

    Siobhain McDonagh – 2022 Speech on Sri Lanka

    The speech made by Siobhain McDonagh, the Labour MP for Mitcham and Morden, in the House of Commons on 9 November 2022.

    I thank colleagues from the APPG for Tamils for securing this incredibly important debate. For 13 long years since the end of the Sri Lankan civil war, the road to truth, justice and accountability has presented the Tamil community with so many challenges, so little progress and so much pain. No one who saw the images of the final days of the civil war could possibly forget them. The mass violation of human rights leaves a stain of injustice on Sri Lanka. The world looked away, but today we will not.

    The ongoing crisis in Sri Lanka is having a devastating effect, with skyrocketing inflation and shortages of basic essentials such as food and medicine. Close to half the population now live below the poverty line. The UN warns that approximately one third of the population is experiencing food insecurity. This is a crisis in democracy decades in the making.

    The world turned away when the Rajapaksa Government cluster-bombed their own people, committed genocide, murdered their journalists and enriched a small group led by one family. Their malign dynastic control stripped the economy bare, leaving behind a broken nation on the brink of economic collapse. The International Crisis Group points to Gotabaya’s authoritarian centralised and non-transparent decision making, describing the Administration as

    “surrounded by cronies and oblivious to criticism”

    and saying that they

    “rejected repeated calls for a course correction as the crisis deepened.”

    What should happen now? First, the country agreed a preliminary deal with the IMF in September for a loan of $2.9 billion. An IMF bailout is essential, but does the Minister agree that any financial assistance must go hand in hand with democratic and human rights reforms, in particular for the Tamil community?

    Meanwhile, during the current crisis, the Sri Lankan Government have once more shown their brutal face, by aggressively cracking down, under draconian anti-terror legislation, on protesters such as Wasantha Mudalige, convener of the Inter University Students’ Federation, who was arrested at a peaceful protest in August. They agreed with the UN and the EU that they would either change or abolish the Prevention of Terrorism Act. Instead, they are using it in full force, creating unsafe conditions for all political activists, and defenders of human rights and democratic rights.

    We should be extremely concerned by the findings of the UN high commissioner on the office on missing persons, which stated that it

    “seems to be aimed at reducing the caseload and closing files rather than a comprehensive approach to establish the truth and ensure justice and redress to families.”

    John McDonnell

    There is a tragic irony that some of our constituents have gone out to Sri Lanka to look for the disappeared, and have been disappeared themselves. That is the failure of the whole system to have accountability and to investigate in an effective way.

    Siobhain McDonagh

    I completely agree with my right hon. Friend. For years and years, families have searched for their loved ones. Women have sought their husbands, sons and brothers, and nothing happens. Irrespective of the international community and its demands, nothing happens. Every Tamil family knows someone who is missing. What steps have been taken to address that judgment?

    In the most recent UN resolution, to which the UK was a penholder, why was there no recommendation to pursue criminal accountability by referral to the International Criminal Court? I could barely believe my eyes when reading the Government’s reasoning, which cited “insufficient…Security Council support.” Who are we to cast a veto for China or Russia before they have done so themselves? Our role on the international stage must be to send the loudest message that impunity will not be tolerated, not to pre-empt the inaction of other nations.

    Finally, why has Britain failed to impose Magnitsky-style sanctions on any Sri Lankan official implicated in human rights abuses or corruption? The Opposition firmly believe that those who have been involved in such crimes should be brought to justice. I hope the Minister will see the strength of cross-party feeling on the issues raised today. I know that the Tamil community in my constituency will be listening carefully to the answers given. Let me finish by thanking them all for their contribution to Mitcham and Morden, and by saying loud and clear that, however long the road to reconciliation may still be, we will keep fighting for justice and human rights until they are achieved.