UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Calum Miller – 2026 Speech on Clearing Illegal Waste from the River Cherwell

    Calum Miller – 2026 Speech on Clearing Illegal Waste from the River Cherwell

    The speech made by Calum Miller, the Liberal Democrat MP for Bicester and Woodstock, in the House of Commons on 6 January 2026.

    It is my privilege to represent a beautiful part of England’s countryside. Stretching from the Chilterns in the east to the Cotswolds in the west, it is criss-crossed by a network of rivers that define the geography of the area. The largest of these is the River Cherwell, which flows from its origin in Northamptonshire for about 40 miles south, where it joins the Thames in Oxford. My constituency also hosts two major highways: the M40 and the A34. It is the proximity of the A34 to the River Cherwell that created both the setting and the opportunity for a major environmental crime to be committed.

    In late October, I was knocking on doors in Kidlington when a conversation opened my eyes. The resident—not particularly interested in politics—was ready to close the door when he said, “Actually, my housemate Billy might want to talk to you.” He shouted upstairs and Billy came down. Billy Burnell is a local angler who knows the River Cherwell inside out. He showed me photos and videos of a vast waste dump beside the river. This was not fly-tipping—it was industrial-scale organised criminal dumping.

    It quickly became clear that this was not new. Billy and others had been raising concerns for months. The Environment Agency had visited the site on 2 July with local council officers and determined it was a major incident, which the EA took responsibility for addressing. Yet local anglers, farmers and residents saw dumping continue through the summer.

    What emerged was staggering: around 20,000 tonnes of waste had been dumped illegally on a floodplain beside the River Cherwell, close to the A34. You had to see it to believe it—and many people did, thanks to media coverage that went viral due to its shocking nature. This mountain of waste was one of the most serious cases of criminal dumping anywhere in the country.

    We quickly had an energetic response from local councillors like Laura Gordon and Gemma Coton, and campaigners stepped up too. Environmental groups including Friends of the Thames helped to amplify the concerns across Oxfordshire and nationally. Around Kidlington, a parliamentary petition gathered nearly 1,000 signatures, which I presented here on 9 December following a series of interventions: my oral question to the Minister on 13 November, my urgent question on 17 November, the question of my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey) to the Prime Minister on 19 November and my meeting with the Minister on 2 December. I thank the Minister for her engagement with this issue from the start and for her work with officials to ensure that the risks were identified and managed.

    Locally, following my initial question and the media coverage that followed, the Environment Agency convened key partners from councils and emergency services to develop a strategy for the site. The agency confirmed last month that it will take the exceptional step of clearing the site itself, citing serious fire and public safety risks. This is highly unusual and entirely reflective of the sheer amount of effort and support local councillors, campaigners and activists put in to raise the alarm. It should never have been allowed to reach this scale, but this decision shows what determined local people, backed by political pressure, can achieve.

    We come now to the situation today. The River Cherwell is, thankfully, not high by its winter standards, yet it still laps against the sandbags and fencing installed by the Environment Agency. Water testing has, thankfully, not shown any significant increase in chemical pollutants downstream from the site. I am truly grateful that we appear to be averting environmental catastrophe—for now. However, now that the winter trees have shed their leaves and revealed the scale of the illegal waste site, it is visible to my constituents and is a constant reminder of the damage already done and the risks ahead.

    My constituents continue to ask what is being done to avert the environmental disaster of the waste contaminating the River Cherwell, and I have some questions to ask the Minister on their behalf. Have the measures to contain the waste been designed to cope with a rise in water levels equivalent to a further 2 metres—the peak recorded at the nearest EA measuring station at Thrupp in November 2024? What actions will be taken by the Environment Agency if water testing reveals that chemical pollutants are leaching into the River Cherwell? What steps have been taken to reduce the risk of fire at the site? The December decision to clear the site was warmly welcomed by all the campaigners who had fought for it, yet the factor that led the Environment Agency to authorise the clearance—the risk of fire from combustible and decomposing waste—remains.

    Local people remain angry that criminals did this to our countryside and deeply frustrated that more than six months after the site was first visited by the Environment Agency, the waste is still there. The key question that my constituents continue to ask is: when will the waste be removed?

    On 11 December, a press release from the Environment Agency and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs stated that

    “preparatory works for clearance will begin imminently. Further details on the timeframe for clearance will be set out shortly.”

    To the best of my knowledge, no physical preparatory works have commenced, and the timeframe for clearance has not been set out. I therefore ask the Minister to tell my constituents the following. What steps have been taken since 11 December? When will a timetable for clearance be published? When will the first lorry remove waste from the site? When does she estimate the site will finally be cleared?

    Finally, my constituents are concerned about who will bear the cost for this clear-up, so can the Minister confirm that all efforts are being made to identify the criminals responsible and recover costs from them, and that in the meantime the Environment Agency will meet the cost of clearance and that it will not fall to local taxpayers? Can she further confirm whether she has an estimate of what the total cost will be?

    Since news broke of the illegal waste dump in Kidlington, there has been concerted media focus on the scandal of industrial-scale, criminal waste dumping up and down the country. Like many people, I had no idea it was so widespread. I have been shocked to learn of how many communities are afflicted by it. Research commissioned by the Liberal Democrats in December indicated that 20% of UK adults have witnessed large-scale illegal dumping in their own local areas, and three in five of those say that the problem has got worse in the last year. This is truly an epidemic of criminal activity that damages our natural spaces and harms the lives of local residents.

    People who play by the rules—who dispose of their own litter carefully and take their household waste to council-run tips—are rightly appalled that gangs are doing this and, too often, getting away with it. I know that it is less of a surprise to the Minister, who has been working on these issues for some time. She will know that the House of Lords Environment and Climate Change Committee, led by my noble Friend Baroness Sheehan, has been critical of the Government’s response to its inquiry and recommendations of October 2025. I do not intend to cover those points extensively, but I want to highlight three that directly reflect the experience in my constituency.

    First, we need to make it easier for people to report waste crime. In this case, constituents told me that they had suspicions and even evidence in the form of number plates or a description of unusual activity, but did not know what to do with it. Should they call the council, the police, the Environment Agency? They did not know, and that stopped them from acting. Early detection of sites is key to stopping the criminals before they get started, and we should make it as easy as possible for people to report concerns. Will the Minister look again at creating a single national hotline for reporting waste crime?

    Secondly, it is clear that the Environment Agency is grossly under-resourced to tackle waste crime. When I first raised this case in the House with the Minister on 13 November, she said that the budget for waste crime enforcement had been increased by 50% this year. That took the budget to £15.6 million, yet as this case shows, the costs of clearance can be close to that full amount. At the same time, the Treasury received £486 million in revenue from landfill tax in 2004-05. Have the Government conducted an assessment of how much additional landfill tax revenue is generated for each pound spent on tackling waste crime? Has DEFRA pressed the Treasury to allocate a larger share of the revenue from landfill tax to the waste crime budget? Given the Government’s response to the House of Lords Environment and Climate Change Committee, can the Minister set out a clear timetable for the publication of the revised national metrics on waste crime and confirm whether interim reporting will be put in place while those indicators are developed?

    Thirdly, in this case it is clear that the Environment Agency prioritised investigating the crime over protecting the site by containing the waste on it. Between 2 July and 15 October, the joint unit for waste crime worked to establish who the landowner was and collected evidence about the crimes. I am glad that that led to an arrest last year. However, nothing was done to anticipate the risks to the site, either from waste entering the River Cherwell or fire hazard. It was only after my question to the Minister on 13 November that work began to put in barriers to prevent the waste entering the Cherwell.

    I want to be clear: the EA has worked swiftly since November to prevent further environmental damage, and working with other local partners it identified the risks of the site, which led to the decision to remove all the waste from it. My concern is that, perhaps for financial reasons, in this case the EA prioritised investigation ahead of early protective action on the site. Does the Minister think that the EA should reassess the balance between investigation and environmental protection when it identifies sites? Is the Minister satisfied that the EA has the resources and expertise to tackle serious organised criminals who are committing waste crimes, or should the National Crime Agency take over major investigations?

    Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)

    I did not realise that the A34 goes through the hon. Gentleman’s constituency, as it does mine—we will have to do a road trip some time. I congratulate him on his excellent speech. The Minister will not be surprised to see me here, because in Newcastle-under-Lyme we lived with the very worst example of waste crime and profit over people that was Walleys Quarry. We have just marked a year since the landfill site was closed and the cowboy operators driven out of town. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we need a stand-alone strategy for waste crime and that we need it quickly?

    Calum Miller

    I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. Perhaps we can look forward to joining up on the A34 at some point. I agree that we need an approach that is truly national and truly strategic. What I have witnessed in my constituency is a piecemeal approach, with best efforts by an under-resourced agency unable to join the dots and, despite the hard work of many people within that agency, a failure to conduct, on the one hand, the investigation and, on the other hand, the preventive measures. It is clear that the estimates of the scale of the criminal activity justify a robust and fulsome national strategy. I agree with him and hope that the Minister will respond to his question.

    Strange as it may seem, my constituents and I have been lucky, in so much as this site met the narrow criteria for exceptional intervention. Many communities up and down the country, such as the one just cited, also face the blight of criminal waste dumping yet do not have exceptional circumstances that allow the EA, under the current resourcing and rules, to clear their sites. The site chosen by criminals to dump waste in my constituency suited them as it had easy, undetected access to the A34, but its very proximity to the A34 became the reason that exceptional action has now been approved to remove the waste.

    What has struck me most about this toxic crime is how strongly people feel it is wrong. It is wrong to be so arrogant as to despoil our beautiful countryside; wrong that too many people get away with it and that the penalties are not higher; and wrong that it takes too long to clear up these sites. When Billy told me about the site, I vowed that I would work to see the waste contained and then cleared. I am glad that that is happening now, and I hope the Minister will confirm that it will be delivered with urgency.

    When I learned how widespread the issue was, I vowed to work with all those like the Minister who care deeply about it to ensure that we make real progress in stopping this crime from blighting so many communities. I look forward to continuing that work with colleagues across the House.

  • Jodie Gosling – 2026 Speech on the Property Registration and Valuation Bill

    Jodie Gosling – 2026 Speech on the Property Registration and Valuation Bill

    The speech made by Josie Gosling, the Labour MP for Nuneaton, in the House of Commons on 6 January 2026.

    I beg to move,

    That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision about requirements relating to the registration and valuation of domestic and non-domestic property; to make provision about exemptions from such requirements; and for connected purposes.

    Happy new year to you and all your team, Mr Speaker. For thriving communities, we need warm homes, and safe places where people can live, thrive and survive, bring up their children and start their businesses.

    We want to see our high streets thriving, with every shop filled, and restored to the proud places they once were as the beating hearts of our communities. My residents in Nuneaton have grown all too used to high streets and residential areas littered with empty properties. Shuttered-up shops and empty storefronts on our local high street deter shoppers and much-needed investment. Vacant homes in disrepair are wasteful and leave hundreds of residents on waiting lists for housing and young families struggling to get on to the property ladder.

    The figures for my local area show that Nuneaton and Bedworth borough council has over 1,800 empty properties—that is equivalent to one in every 24. Local leaders in Nuneaton, including council leader Councillor Chris Watkins and Councillor Steve Hey, have fought to address the issue, recognising the deep impact it has on our communities—it is literally a waste of space, instead of providing hope and security. I know that they are supportive of the second-home surcharge, as well as additional charges on long-term empty properties. Those are important levers for local authorities that have been strengthened by this Labour Government. However, those measures alone do not account for the full picture or scale of the problem that local authorities such as Nuneaton and Bedworth face.

    When a property is derelict, it is often removed from the valuation list. That is because it is no longer considered habitable or usable; it is no longer an asset. That measure was originally intended to enable renovations to take place on properties without additional costs being incurred. We support some of that and do not wish to remove the legislation as a whole; we merely wish to time-limit the exclusion, because a deregistered property does not appear on the valuation list unless it is brought back into use. That has led to the situation where properties can lie unoccupied for years. Potential is wasted and properties become an eyesore, attracting antisocial behaviour and restricting local authorities’ capacity to transform our neighbourhoods and high streets.

    Nuneaton has seen properties left dormant for decades. The former Kingsholme pub has stood empty since 2008 and two houses on Stoney Road were removed from the valuation list in 2000. Those homes have stood empty for a quarter of a century, while we face a national housing crisis and children sleep in temporary accommodation. Nuneaton is growing and the houses we need are being built, but we also have to use the houses and properties that we already have effectively. Nationally, an estimated 260,000 residences are long-term empty. That is a quarter of a million, many of which have been zero-rated and do not pay back to their local councils.

    I know that many honourable colleagues have the pleasure of getting the train through my constituency each week as they travel down the west coast main line to Westminster. Those who venture further into Nuneaton will see at first hand the impacts that the regulations are having. Nuneaton’s transformed town centre, Grayson Place, is due to open later this year, which is a real opportunity to redefine our town. Yet at the town end of Coton Road, as people enter the brilliant redeveloped site, there is a row of empty properties with buddleia sprouting out of the roofs. Three of those properties are nil-rated—they hold no value—preventing the council from charging an empty property levy and from holding the owners to account for the neglect of buildings that blight my community.

    At the other end of Coton Road, next to the Coton arches, honourable colleagues will find the Cube, which was formerly a church and has been left to fall into disrepair. Despite the property no longer being owned by a church, it still receives its place of worship exemption, again meaning that it pays nothing. There is no incentive to bring it back from the brink or to make such properties the assets that my town needs them to be, and no responsibility for the impact on the area. Further, once a property has left the register, it becomes increasingly difficult to trace those responsible for it.

    Nuneaton and Bedworth borough council welcomes the increased powers, but those powers can only do so much. Like many councils, after a decade of harsh austerity, it lacks the financial capacity to compulsorily purchase or restore the sheer number of properties. Nuneaton and Bedworth council leaders view the reorganisation of the Valuation Office Agency as a welcome step forward, but it is clear that the registration and exemption regimes need to be updated to ensure that councils have the power to hold the owners of empty properties accountable for the state of their buildings and turn those eyesores back into assets. That is why my Bill proposes that all properties should remain on the register unless they are demolished, that all properties are given a value, and that all exemptions become time-limited, ensuring that all exempt properties are being used for their exempt purpose.

    As has been noted by my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst), this is an issue that impacts almost all our constituencies. Updating our registration and exemption rules will provide us with the tools to embrace regeneration and remove the barriers that hold us back. I hope that my hon. Friends and colleagues will support this Bill and the measures within it today. We all want to see the effective use of our assets and to ensure that all our buildings are put to use to house our residents who need homes and that our local high streets are open for business.

    Question put and agreed to.

    Ordered,

    That Jodie Gosling, Rachel Taylor and Cat Eccles present the Bill.

    Jodie Gosling accordingly presented the Bill.

    Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 16 January, and to be printed (Bill 354).

  • Paul Davies – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    Paul Davies – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    The speech made by Paul Davies, the Labour MP for Colne Valley, in Westminster Hall on 6 January 2026.

    Forty-seven per cent of cancers diagnosed in the UK are rare and less common cancers, and 55% of deaths are from rare and less common cancers. That means that, every year, around 180,000 people will be diagnosed with a rare and less common cancer, and more than 92,000 people will die from such cancers. Blood cancer is one such cancer, and I recently met the Blood Cancer Alliance to discuss improving access to lifesaving blood cancer treatments across the UK. Over 280,000 people in the UK are living with blood cancer, and every year 40,000 more receive a diagnosis, including 5,000 children. It is the fifth most common cancer, the most prevalent childhood cancer and the third biggest cancer killer in our country. However, despite amazing advances in tech and treatment, our outcomes are falling behind in the nations.

    The reason is clear: systemic barriers within the NHS and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence appraisal processes are preventing patients from accessing innovative therapies. Between 2019 and 2025, over a third of NICE appraisals for new blood cancer treatments were terminated—more than double the rate for other cancers. Those are not ineffective drugs; many are available overseas, and even privately in the UK. That creates a two-tier system in which those who can pay receive better care than those who cannot. It is unacceptable. I have been told that treatments such as chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy can transform lives, extending survival and improving quality of life.

    The current system, with rigid cost-effectiveness thresholds and inflexible commercial frameworks, is failing patients. That is why I warmly welcome the UK Government’s cancer plan, which represents a vital opportunity to reset our approach to cancer care and to ensure that innovation is embraced, not obstructed. By prioritising timely access to effective treatments and addressing systemic barriers, the cancer plan can help deliver world-class outcomes for patients.

    I stand with the Blood Cancer Alliance and Cancer52 in calling for urgent, joined-up action from Government, NICE, the NHS and industry. Together we can ensure that every person with blood cancer has timely access to the best possible care, because survival should never depend on postcode or income.

  • Vikki Slade – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    Vikki Slade – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    The speech made by Vikki Slade, the Liberal Democrat MP for Mid Dorset and North Poole, in Westminster Hall on 6 January 2026.

    I thank the hon. Member for Southport (Patrick Hurley) for that really moving account. We know that cancer affects us all. In my family it claimed my mum Lin; my sister-in-law Lisa and my stepmum Sally have both beaten it, and now my dad Ray is living with terminal cancer. One of my team is also undergoing treatment for cancer, so we know that it is prevalent among all our lives. All of them were fit, healthy people who did everything right, as are so many others each year who get the horrible news or—worse—turn up in A&E after becoming suddenly unwell. According to a Cancer Research study, many of those patients had visited their GP but had not been referred for tests, either because they did not meet the thresholds or because they had been missed altogether. This is not a criticism of our GPs, who are working in highly difficult situations. Indeed, when I shadowed Dr Wright from Walford Mill surgery in Wimborne, he had the sober task of sharing a diagnosis and undertaking a very personal test during his appointment, which he let me witness.

    If diagnosis doubled across the six least survivable cancers alone, an additional 7,500 lives a year would be saved. Each year in my constituency of Mid Dorset and North Poole, there are 540 diagnoses of cancer and 300 cancer deaths. Although 85% of them should be starting treatment within 62 days, the number is actually only 60%. What is the Minister doing to bridge that gap? If we met the target in my constituency, 70 additional people would be getting on with their lives. Across the country, 45,000 additional people would be given a greater chance of not just surviving but having a life shared with those they love.

    Furthermore, once they get to hospital, patients are faced with out-of-date machinery and not enough specialist nurses. Macmillan Cancer Support says there is an acute shortage and calls for a cancer nurse fund to increase the numbers by 3,700. Will the future cancer strategy include such funding?

    I want to speak briefly about pancreatic cancer, which claimed the life of my cousin Colin, a super-fit former Welsh Commonwealth games cyclist who died in his 50s despite the best care available. Many other constituents have written to me about poor prognosis for this treatment. They have flagged that the NHS has approved selective internal radiation therapy, but only for colorectal and liver cancers—not those whose primary cancer was in the pancreas and then spread to the liver. These families are keen for urgent trials to be undertaken to allow the treatment to be used, given the incredibly short life expectancy faced by patients. Will the Minister consider that?

    We have been waiting such a long time for this cancer strategy. We need the workforce plan and the road map for the NHS plan. Nine hundred and fifty people will be diagnosed with cancer today, and those people need hope.

  • Patrick Hurley – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    Patrick Hurley – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    The speech made by Patrick Hurley, the Labour MP for Southport, in Westminster Hall on 6 January 2026.

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. Less Survivable Cancers Awareness Week is an important marker in the calendar, but I want to talk about another important marker when it comes to these cancers—one that is important for me and my family anyway—because this year marks 20 years since I was made unavoidably aware of the devastation of oesophageal cancer. In May of that year, my father developed the classic symptoms: difficulty swallowing, feeling like food was getting stuck, heartburn and weight loss. He was diagnosed in August and died on 23 December: from becoming symptomatic to losing his life was just seven months. The rapidity of the decline was overwhelming. Barely had he been diagnosed than he was given a terminal diagnosis. I must admit, though, that I was not giving my father my full attention during that time. In almost any other circumstances I would have been a much more dutiful son, but my own focus was elsewhere that year. On 1 August 2006, my wife Susan also became symptomatic with oesophageal cancer. She was diagnosed on 11 September and died on 14 November.

    The speed with which I read that sentence reflects the speed with which Sue died. There was barely any chance to understand what was happening, to seek help or for the family to manage. That is not unusual with these sorts of diseases. It is the sort of story that thousands of us know. Crucially, for my Southport constituency, it is also a story that disproportionately impacts people from the north-west and from north Wales. For my family, there was not any long fight or slow decline—only shock, confusion, urgent decisions and death. That is what a less survivable cancer looks like.

    May I make a clear ask of the Minister today? I am asking for a personal commitment, and a commitment across Government, to drive up survival rates for all these less survivable cancers, but most urgently—for my personal history and for the geographical distribution that shows that my part of the country has higher levels than elsewhere in the UK—for oesophageal cancer. That could mean things such as early diagnosis, recognising that one size fits all does not work. It could mean fast-track treatment pathways once suspicion is raised. Above all else, it should include serious investment in experimental and pre-symptomatic techniques, finding ways to detect cancers before symptoms even appear. These are difficult cancers to deal with, and that is why they need targeted action. I am here today because two people I loved did not get the help they needed, so I urge the Government to help other families avoid that same fate.

  • Kemi Badenoch – 2026 Comments on West Midlands Police and Football Policing Decision

    Kemi Badenoch – 2026 Comments on West Midlands Police and Football Policing Decision

    The comments made by Kemi Badenoch, the Leader of the Opposition, on 6 January 2026.

    West Midlands Police capitulated to Islamists and then collaborated with them to cover it up.

    They knew extremists were planning to attack Jews for going to a football match, and their response was to blame and remove Jewish people instead. They presented an inversion of reality and misled a Parliamentary Committee.

    We have had enough of this in Britain.

    The Chief Constable’s position is untenable.

    The British Police serve the British public, not local sectarian interests.

  • Keir Starmer – 2026 Remarks after Coalition of the Willing Meeting

    Keir Starmer – 2026 Remarks after Coalition of the Willing Meeting

    The remarks made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 6 January 2026.

    It’s important that we are starting the year like this –  

    European and American allies, side-by-side with President Zelenskyy…  

    Standing for peace. 

    And we are closer to that goal than ever…  

    But the hardest yards are still ahead…  

    So we’re here today to keep driving that effort forward.  

    And we’ve had a very constructive meeting…  

    Which has built on the excellent progress made in negotiations over recent days and weeks.  

    The purpose of the Coalition of the Willing… 

    Is to help deliver a peace that can last –  

    And to work with the US to guarantee Ukraine’s security for the long term. 

    This work is now more advanced than ever.   

    Today’s joint declaration set that out in clear terms –  

    On top of that, and alongside President Zelenskyy and President Macron,  

    We went even further today.

    We signed a Declaration of Intent… 

    On the deployment of forces to Ukraine in the event of a peace deal. 

    This is a vital part of our iron-cast commitment to stand with Ukraine for the long term.  

    It paves the way for the legal framework… 

    Under which British, French and partner forces could operate on Ukrainian soil –  

    Securing Ukraine’s skies and seas –  

    And regenerating Ukraine’s armed forces for the future. 

    We discussed these issues in detail today. 

    And so I can say that, following a ceasefire,  

    The UK and France will establish “military hubs” across Ukraine… 

    And build protected facilities for weapons and military equipment… 

    To support Ukraine’s defensive needs. 

    And with our Coalition partners,  

    We also have agreed significant further steps.  

    First, that we will participate in US-led monitoring and verification of any ceasefire. 

    Second, we will support the long-term provision of armaments for Ukraine’s defence. 

    And third, we will work towards binding commitments… 

    To support Ukraine in the case of a future armed attack by Russia. 

    This is all about building the practical foundations on which peace would rest. 

    But we can only get to a peace deal if Putin is ready to make compromises. 

    And so, we have to be frank –  

    For all Russia’s words…  

    Putin is not showing that he is ready for peace. 

    Over the last few weeks, we have seen the opposite: 

    Further horrific strikes on Ukraine… 

    Killing and wounding civilians… 

    And cutting off power from millions of people in the dead of winter. 

    His forces hit a hospital in Kyiv just yesterday.  

    And he has tried to distract from peace efforts with unfounded claims of attacks on his residence. 

    Now this only hardens our resolve.  

    We will continue to step up our support to Ukraine’s defence in 2026… 

    To ensure it gets the equipment and backing it needs to continue the fight. 

    And we will keep up the pressure on Russia… 

    Including further measures on the oil traders and Shadow Fleet operators funding Putin’s war chest.  

    We will continue these efforts until they come to the table in good faith… 

    And until we realise the goal that we all share – of a just and lasting peace. 

    Thank you, Emmanuel.

  • Siobhain McDonagh – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    Siobhain McDonagh – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    The speech made by Siobhain McDonagh, the Labour MP for Mitcham and Morden, in Westminster Hall on 6 January 2026.

    I thank the hon. Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones) for organising this debate. My purpose is to find a cure for glioblastoma brain tumours, the biggest cancer killer of children and adults under 40, with a life expectancy from diagnosis of just nine months and a five-year survival rate of 5%. The only way to find a cure and improve outcomes for a cancer that has seen no improvement in 30 years is through drug trials.

    In the absence of commercial or charitable glioblastoma drug trials, we launched our own trial in memory of my late sister, Margaret, in July last year. The trial is being run by Dr Paul Mulholland, Europe’s leading consultant on glioblastoma, who is based at University College London. It will include 16 newly diagnosed patients at University College hospital. This is a pre-surgery immunotherapy trial focused on patients who have received no prior treatment. The drug is given before surgery, allowing the immune system to attack the tumour before it is removed.

    I am delighted to confirm that we have already recruited five patients and, while the trial remains at an early stage, we are encouraged by the early findings. This is only the start. This journey has proven extraordinarily difficult and has been possible only because of an alignment of factors that very few will ever encounter: access to one of Europe’s leading clinicians working from a major London teaching hospital, alongside a world-class university; a group of my sister’s friends who have campaigned tirelessly and raised more than £1 million in two years; and the engagement and backing of the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to get the trial over the line.

    Our ambition is to establish 10 such trials using 10 different immunotherapy drugs, but ultimately our ability to raise money will end. How can Dr Mulholland apply for funding to support the programme of trials using repurposed immunotherapy drugs? Can the Minister’s team provide a written explanation and a link setting out how a bid can be made to the NIHR to access those funds? It is a straight question, and I would welcome a straight answer.

  • Steff Aquarone – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    Steff Aquarone – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    The speech made by Steff Aquarone, the Liberal Democrat MP for North Norfolk, in Westminster Hall on 6 January 2026.

    I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones) on securing the debate. He is a truly committed campaigner on cancer care.

    Over previous decades, we have managed to achieve great progress on cancer care and survival. Many cancers now have high survival rates and straightforward detection and treatment, and survivors live long and happy lives. However, that is not the case across the board, and the less survivable cancers are the prime examples. Survival rates remain stubbornly low, treatment rates are shockingly low and the situation facing someone who is diagnosed with a less survivable cancer is often unacceptable.

    I want to describe how these deadly cancers, and access to care for them, impact people in rural communities such as mine. Every day that such cancers go undetected reduces the likelihood of survival, but too many constituents either struggle to secure a GP appointment or have difficulty navigating our ailing transport system to attend one. Those who have been diagnosed and are receiving specialist treatment are likely to have to journey outside North Norfolk to Norfolk and Norwich University hospital, or to Addenbrooke’s in Cambridge.

    I warmly welcome the fact that Cromer hospital delivers chemotherapy to more than 30 patients a day in its new cancer centre, but there is still only one cancer treatment available within my constituency. Additionally, the loss of convalescence care beds in my area means that there are fewer opportunities for people to recover from major treatments closer to home.

    Looking to the future, I am pleased to see new diagnostic tools and treatment options being brought forward by talented researchers across the country. The revolutionary breath test for pancreatic and other less survivable cancers could be a real game changer. However, I have real concerns that when those new and revolutionary tools and treatments are rolled out, rural areas such as North Norfolk may wait longer to receive the benefits. I hope the Minister can reassure me that her Department is working to ensure that any newly approved treatments and diagnostic tools will be just as easily available in rural communities as they are in the big cities.

    I am grateful to all the charities that make up the Less Survivable Cancers Taskforce for their hard work and advocacy for patients, survivors and loved ones who have felt overlooked for too long. They also do vital work in making us all aware of the symptoms we should watch out for, and when to speak to our GP if something does not seem right. I hope that as we come to Less Survivable Cancers Awareness Week, people in North Norfolk will take the time to learn the signs and symptoms, because when we catch these deadly cancers early, lives can be saved.

  • Kemi Badenoch – 2026 Comments on the Chagos Islands

    Kemi Badenoch – 2026 Comments on the Chagos Islands

    The comments made by Kemi Badenoch, the Leader of the Opposition, on 5 January 2026.

    Last night the Conservatives defeated the Government four times over its Chagos surrender. Surrendering a vital military base weakens our security and costs £35bn.

    Britain must project strength. Only the Conservatives will stand up to hostile actors and for our national interest.