Parkinson’s Disease

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Wednesday 21st May 2025 Westminster Hall

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stuart. I thank the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for securing today’s debate. As hon. Members in the Chamber have noted, Parkinson’s does not just affect movement; it affects every part of life. It disrupts eating, swallowing, sleeping, mental wellbeing and independence. Although more than 40 symptoms are recognised, each person’s experience is different—as unique as their fingerprint.

I want to focus a little on one group today: the experience of women with Parkinson’s is often more complex, more misunderstood and more neglected. That was brought to my attention by a constituent of mine in Mid Sussex, whose mother was diagnosed six years ago; it took her mother five years to get an accurate diagnosis. Women are more likely to be misdiagnosed, and more likely to be underdiagnosed. They are more likely to experience delays in treatment and to have their symptoms dismissed or attributed to anxiety or the menopause. Some research even suggests that women’s Parkinson’s symptoms may fluctuate more dramatically due to hormonal cycles, but we do not yet fully understand that because, historically, as in so many other contexts, women have been under-represented in clinical trials. Women with Parkinson’s are also more likely to carry the invisible burdens of being carers themselves, all the while struggling with a progressive neurological disease.

We need gender-specific research, treatment strategies and clinical training. We need health professionals who understand that Parkinson’s in women is a critical gap in care that we must close. When I submitted a written parliamentary question about that recently, the response revealed that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has no specific guidelines for Parkinson’s that reflect those gender differences. We need, as a society, to realise how differently the disease can present in and affect women.

Across the board, people with Parkinson’s face long waits for specialist care, delays in diagnosis and difficulty in accessing essential treatments. I recently talked to Richard, a constituent of mine in Mid Sussex who has Parkinson’s. He spoke of the profound difference that such treatments can make; he told me that they make life-changing differences to him. Yet for too many they are inaccessible due to postcode lotteries, which hon. Members have mentioned, and a lack of trained staff. What is perhaps worse is that some patients in hospitals are not even receiving their medication on time. For people with Parkinson’s, that delay can mean the difference between mobility and being bedbound, between clarity and confusion, and between dignity and indignity. We have to do better.

We must also talk about mental health. Nearly half of all people with Parkinson’s experience anxiety and depression. As the disease progresses, up to 60% develop psychotic symptoms, and they are up to six times more likely to develop dementia. Those are staggering figures.

What needs to change? We Liberal Democrats are calling for urgent reform, starting with a full review of the medicine supply chain, to ensure that no person has to live in fear of running out of vital medication. We want a faster approval process for new treatments through an expansion of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency’s capacity—not slashing it, as the Government have done by cutting 40% of its workforce. Every person with Parkinson’s or other long-term conditions needs access to a named GP, because continuity of care should not be a luxury. We also need to restore the importance of mental health in NHS planning. The Government’s decision to let the share of NHS funding going to mental health to fall and to scrap targets for dementia and mental health was wrong and totally short-sighted.

We also know that family carers are at breaking point. I thank the hon. Members for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East (Seamus Logan) and for Strangford (Jim Shannon), as well as my hon. Friend the Member for Tewkesbury (Cameron Thomas), for raising the issue of the personal independence payment. According to the Government’s own assessment, 150,000 family carers are going to be impacted by 2029-30 as a result of the proposals on PIP, and that is on top of the 800,000 people losing PIP. Has the Minister pressed his colleagues in the Department for Work and Pensions on that point when it comes to conditions such as Parkinson’s?

People with Parkinson’s should be supported not only to live, but to live with independence and dignity. Parkinson’s is cruel: it steals movement, independence and, far too often, hope. But we can fight back with the right policies, the right funding and the right political will. We can make a difference. Let us listen to the voices of people living with Parkinson’s—including women, whose voices and needs have been overlooked for far too long.

Mental Health Bill [Lords]

Alison Bennett Excerpts

2nd reading
Monday 19th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Wes Streeting]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I am very glad that my Department is working closely with other Departments across a range of issues, in particular with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on the link between employment, welfare and health, and with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education on the reform of special educational needs and disabilities, and the interface between health and education services—I could go on. The point is that a wide range of factors have an impact on people’s health and wellbeing. Indeed, people’s health and wellbeing can have an impact on a wide range of aspects of their lives, which is why we have to work in a mission-driven cross-Government way.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

I thank the Secretary of State for giving way; he is very kind. I was interested, when he was talking about the impacts of mental health on society at large, whether he has given consideration to the Carers Trust proposal, which would amend the Bill so that when a parent has a mental health crisis, checks and safeguards are put in place to ensure that any young carers in that family are suitably cared for?

[Wes Streeting]

I am grateful to the hon. Member for that intervention and for raising the very serious issue—an issue of increasing prevalence—of the impact of parental mental ill health on children and young people. We are very happy to look at the Carers Trust proposal, and to take representations on that and other issues as the Bill progresses through its Commons stages. We want to ensure that we get not just the legal basis of mental health provision in the right place, but practical care. As we think about children and young people’s mental health and wellbeing, we also need to take into account their parents’ mental health and wellbeing through that lens, too.

Patients’ choices and needs will always be taken into account, thanks to the introduction of a new clinical checklist. It requires clinicians to involve patients and those close to them in decisions affecting their care, while retaining the power to treat individuals compulsorily where absolutely necessary.

Parkinson’s Awareness Month

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Thursday 1st May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for Dunfermline and Dollar (Graeme Downie) for bringing forward this important debate, and I thank all Members who have contributed. Everyone has made excellent contributions that were thoughtful and moving.

Right now in the UK around 153,000 people are living with Parkinson’s, and that number is set to increase to 172,000 by 2030. Richard from Burgess Hill in my constituency is one of those many thousands. I count Richard as a friend; he is someone I greatly admire for his courage and tenacity. I was lucky enough to speak to him recently and get a brief insight into his life with Parkinson’s. He told me that something he has noticed since his diagnosis is increased anxiety. He says that he now gets anxious about everyday things in a way that he never used to. He also said that the part of experience he has found most depressing is knowing that it is, in his words, “a one-way street”, where his condition can only be managed by using ever-increasing levels of medication.

From even a short conversation with Richard, it is clear just how complex people’s experiences can be. It is also clear to me that we need to do better, as many hon. Members have said, and that we have solutions already but we just need to get on with it. Parkinson’s is the fastest-growing neurological condition in the world. It is progressive, it fluctuates, and it affects everything from movement, swallowing, sleep and speech through to mental health. There are over 40 symptoms, and each person’s experience is unique. Half of those living with the condition, like Richard, experience anxiety or depression, and up to 60% can develop psychosis. They are also six times more likely to develop dementia.

Parkinson’s UK has identified some of the major failings in care today. They include long waits for specialists, a lack of access to expert multidisciplinary teams, people not getting their medication on time in hospital, and limited mental health and dementia support. There is also a postcode lottery when it comes to advanced treatments such as Produodopa and deep-brain stimulation. Those failings have consequences: unplanned hospital stays, severe complications and worsening mental health. Parkinson’s costs the UK an incredible £3 billion a year. In England alone, unplanned hospital admissions cost £277 million. So this is not only a health crisis but one with significant economic impacts.

I and my Liberal Democrat colleagues believe that the system must change urgently and that the Government have to act. First, we have got to fix the basics. To do that, we need to review the medicines supply chain. People with Parkinson’s must get their meds on time. We also need to expand the MHRA’s capacity, reversing the 40% workforce cut, and reducing the time for treatments to reach patients.

Secondly, we need to put care and support front and centre. We can do that by giving people with Parkinson’s access to a named GP—someone who knows their story and their condition—and by making mental health a priority, not an afterthought. That means regular mental health check-ups, easier access to services through walk-in hubs and restoring the mental health and dementia care targets that the Government have abandoned.

Thirdly, the Government must step up and support carers. Behind every person with Parkinson’s, there is often someone else who cares for them; someone who is quietly exhausted. We must provide respite breaks and ensure that carers have access to paid leave. We need to fix the broken social care system once and for all. It is time for those cross-party talks—no more delays. As I have said in this place before, we will clear our diaries to get those talks happening. This issue is simply too important for diary clashes. I wonder whether the Minister can give us any clarity and a date on those vital talks.

Finally, we have got to help people live and work with dignity. I and my Liberal Democrat colleagues are campaigning for: a new right to flexible work; better accessibility standards for public spaces; a stronger blue badge framework; the incorporation of the UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities into UK law; and the closing of the disability employment gap. We can do that if we implement a dedicated strategy for disabled workers, simplify the application process and introduce adjustment passports so that workplace support follows the person, even if their job changes.

This is a health issue, an economic issue and a social justice issue. As others have said, it is about human dignity. We owe it to people living with Parkinson’s that we must do better, not some day but now. Let us build a future where those with Parkinson’s like Richard get the proper help and support they deserve.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Minister.

Oral Answers to Questions

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Tuesday 25th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

My constituent Ben has spent two decades working as a nurse. He tells me that his paramedic and midwife colleagues received automatic pay band increases post qualification while he and his nursing peers did not. Ben and his hard-working nursing colleagues have missed out on tens of thousands of pounds compared to colleagues in other disciplines. Does the Minister agree that something must be done urgently to make up for this inequity?

[Karin Smyth]

I am absolutely clear that we need to make sure that the job evaluation scheme looks at staff across the piece and that people are rewarded appropriately for the work they are asked to do. We will do that as part of our discussions with the NHS Staff Council, and we will be working consistently with staff as part of the 10-year plan to ensure that people are rewarded. We depend on these staff, and we want to encourage them to be part of the NHS workforce. That is the approach we intend to take.

NHS England Update

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Thursday 13th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

The Secretary of State’s NHS shake-up is well under way. Many Members would agree that the NHS used to be the envy of the world, but years of Conservative failure have left patients suffering and unable to get the care that they desperately need. I and my Liberal Democrat colleagues therefore welcome steps to reform the NHS.

The new leadership of the NHS has much to do, but can the Secretary of State advise the House whether new legislation will be needed to scrap NHS England given that he told the shadow Minister that it will take two years to complete this merger? When will that new legislation, if it is required, be brought forward?

Any attempt to fix the NHS will ultimately fail if we also do not address the crisis in social care. The Secretary of State must show the same urgency in reforming social care as is being shown on the NHS. Where is that urgency? Long-promised cross-party talks have now been postponed indefinitely with no new date in sight. Care providers are hanging by a thread due to the rising cost of national insurance contributions. Does the Secretary of State agree that any attempt to fix the NHS will prove futile if we ignore the elephant in the NHS waiting room that is the crisis in social care? We will clear our diaries for cross-party talks, so will the Secretary of State give us a date today?

[Wes Streeting]

I am grateful to the Liberal Democrats for those questions. Much of the change needed can be delivered without the need for primary legislation, which is a relief because, as right hon. and hon. Members will have noticed, this Government have come into office with the most ambitious legislative programme of any incoming Government. Time is at a premium, given the business of this House and the other place. We will work immediately to move forward without changes to primary legislation, but we will need to make them. I am working with the Leader of the House and business managers to ensure an appropriate timetable that enables us to do the things that we need to do in a timely way, but that also safeguards the ambitious legislative programme that has already been set out.

The hon. Lady is right to talk about the importance of social care. She asked where the urgency is. It was to be found in the immediate steps that the Chancellor took on coming into office to stabilise the finances of my Department, with an immediate release of funding. It came with the Budget, which delivered an extra £26 billion for the Department for Health and Social Care, protected funding specifically for social care and boosted spending power for local authorities. It came with the biggest expansion of carer’s allowance since the 1970s, and an £86 million increase in the disabled facilities grant not just from next year but released in January for the remainder of this financial year. The urgency is reflected in the Employment Rights Bill, which makes provision for fair pay agreements to deal with the work- force crisis—work with employers and trade unions to prepare for that legislation and the introduction of fair pay agreements is already under way.

I regret that we have not convened cross-party talks. That is genuinely due to practicalities on the part of a number of parties involved. We will be in touch over the next week to make arrangements for Baroness Casey to engage with parties across the House.

Draft Food and Feed (Regulated Products) (Amendment, Revocation, Consequential and Transitional Provision) Regulations 2025

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Tuesday 4th March 2025 General Committees

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John, and I welcome the Minister to her place. The Liberal Democrats welcome this simplified process. There are strong advantages to it, and it will help to make sure that we deliver the food we need. However, that cannot come at the cost of safety, so I would like to put a couple of questions to the Minister.

Effort needs to be made across Government to improve the reporting of any concerning new data or revelations. That is why we have long called for a duty of candour and for an office of the whistleblower. What assurances can the Government provide that ongoing monitoring will be as effective as possible so that, if a long-term negative effect is present years after a product’s introduction, it can be identified and addressed? And do the Government believe that any measures need to be taken to strengthen the ongoing work of the FSA and the FSS?

Cardiovascular Disease: Prevention

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Thursday 13th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Mundell. I congratulate the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) on his characteristically detailed and impassioned speech in opening the debate.

Cardiovascular disease, or CVD, affects around 7 million people in the UK, making it a significant cause of both disability and premature death. As the hon. Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) just shared, its impact is felt by many of us. In my family, my paternal grandfather, Lance, died of a heart attack in his 50s, and my maternal grandfather, Bill, died of an aortic aneurysm in his 80s. Thirteen years ago my father, Hugh, had a triple heart bypass. Happily he survived, and he is doing well 13 years on. I am enormously grateful to the NHS for what it did to save my father’s life, but much more needs to be done to prevent the impacts of cardiovascular disease on so many people in the UK.

We know that there is a huge variety of causes of cardiovascular disease. One cause, for which we have the solutions, is socioeconomic disparities. The truth is that those who live in the most deprived areas of our country are at far greater risk. People in the 10% most deprived communities are almost twice as likely to die from CVD as those in the least deprived areas. Clearly, there is work to do to close this gap. It is unfathomable to me that in a small and supposedly prosperous nation, a man living in Kensington and Chelsea can now expect to live 27 years longer than a man in Blackpool. That is not just alarming; it is unjust. The disparity worsens when we consider those who have severe mental illness. For people with extreme mental illness, their life expectancy is 15 to 20 years less than that of the general population, and they have a 53% higher risk of developing CVD.

The previous Conservative Government’s lack of support exacerbated these health disparities. Public health funding was cut by 26% in 2015, leaving local authorities unable to provide vital services. With the new Government showing some signs of making genuine investment in the right places, I believe this situation can change—indeed, it must change.

My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I are committed to creating a healthier and more equal society. The UK has long been known for its grassroots sports, high-quality food production and world-leading medical research. We should be one of the healthiest countries in the world. Under the previous Conservative Government, however, the country became sicker, lagging far behind our international peers. That is why the Liberal Democrats are calling on the new Government to take urgent action to support people in leading healthier lives by reversing the Conservative cuts to public health funding. I firmly believe that improving public health is not just about treatment—far from it, in fact. It is also about empowering people to live healthier lives, creating healthier environments and supporting communities to make decisions that improve their health. In doing these things, we will take pressure off overburdened systems and create a more resilient population.

There are several steps that we propose to address the current situation. First, there should be a reversal of cuts to the public health grant, enabling local authorities to provide essential preventive services. Secondly, a proportion of the public health grant should be set aside for those experiencing the worst health inequalities in order to co-produce plans for their communities. Thirdly, a health creation unit should be established in the Cabinet Office to lead work across Government to improve the nation’s health and tackle health inequalities.

Our vision for the future also includes tackling the obesity crisis. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence found a direct correlation between deprivation and obesity in both adults and children. That is why we are calling for an end to the two-child limit and the benefits cap, which would lift over 500,000 children out of poverty. We would also expand free school meals to all children in poverty and work to ensure that every child in primary school has access to a healthy meal. We must also protect our children from the harmful effects of ultra-processed food advertising, and encourage healthier lifestyles by supporting walking and cycling. Our transport networks need to be redesigned to prioritise active travel and road safety, ensuring that every community can access safe spaces for walking and cycling.

My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I are committed to making the UK a healthier and fairer place to live. We know that investment in prevention, public health and primary care is key to tackling the root causes of cardiovascular disease and improving the lives of millions across the nation. This issue is solvable and we have the answers. We just need to act.

HIV Testing Week

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Thursday 13th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan. I congratulate the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) on his opening remarks and on bringing this debate to the Chamber.

In the UK alone, around 17,000 lives have been lost to this disease, and despite what many might think, the crisis is not over. We have seen an alarming increase in diagnoses since 2021, and between 2019 and 2023 they rose by 56%. The situation is particularly striking in London. In 2023, our capital recorded the highest new HIV diagnosis rate of any region in England, with 980 people diagnosed for the first time. A further 563 people were diagnosed after initially being diagnosed abroad. The latest estimate is that approximately 107,000 people are living with HIV in the UK, and around 5,000 of them remain undiagnosed and unaware of their condition.

Meanwhile, even though testing rates improved by 8% between 2022 and 2023, they remain 4% lower than pre-covid levels. Although testing among gay and bisexual men has reached record levels, testing rates for heterosexual men are 22% lower than before the pandemic. For women, the picture is not much better: rates are still 10% lower across the board than pre-pandemic levels.

Globally, the situation is critical. We have made significant progress—new HIV infections have dropped by 60% since the peak in 1995—but 39.9 million people were still living with HIV in 2023. Tragically, 1.3 million people were newly infected last year. If we need a reminder that the battle is far from over, that is it. The majority of new infections are concentrated in poorer regions, with sub-Saharan Africa bearing the heaviest burden. In every week of 2023, 4,000 adolescent girls and young women between the ages of 15 and 24 were infected globally, with the majority in sub-Saharan Africa. There is also a disturbing link between conflict, sexual violence and the spread of HIV. In Rwanda, for instance, the prevalence of HIV in rural areas surged from 1% before the 1994 conflict to 11% just three years later. We know that that kind of impact will be felt for generations.

The good news is that there is much we can do, but we have to get on with it. At home, dying from AIDS is no longer an inevitable outcome—indeed, organisations that the hon. Member for Brighton Pavilion (Siân Berry) mentioned, such as the Sussex Beacon, which serves both her constituents and mine in Mid Sussex, are now looking to reconfigure services to adapt to changing patient needs—but the alarming rise in HIV diagnoses demands stronger action to expand access to testing, treatment and education for those most at risk. My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I have long called for equitable access to PrEP for all those who can benefit from it, but the Conservative Government’s cuts to the public health grant undermined the delivery of vital sexual health services. The Liberal Democrats are committed to reversing those cuts and investing £1 billion annually to strengthen public health programmes. Among other things, that would help to ensure that we can eliminate HIV transmissions in England by 2030.

We are campaigning for five key things: first, universal access to HIV prevention and treatment; secondly, the eradication of stigma and discrimination tied to HIV and HIV testing—I commend the Prime Minister for making progress on that this week by taking an HIV test, as many hon. Members have mentioned—thirdly, widespread testing and education about HIV; fourthly, a clear path to the elimination of transmission in England by 2030; and fifthly, crucially, the restoration of the public health grant, which was slashed by a fifth under the Conservative Government.

To tackle this problem effectively, we must also look beyond our borders. Despite being preventable and treatable, AIDS remains one of the world’s leading killers. The Global Fund has saved millions of lives, but we must keep up the momentum if we are to defeat these diseases for good. The Labour Government have reneged on their manifesto pledge, cutting spending on international aid from 0.58% to 0.5% of gross national income. UK foreign aid has been a lifeline for millions of vulnerable people around the world. Cutting back on that aid is not just a budgetary decision; it is a matter of life and death.

The Government must commit to restoring the aid budget. That is true now more than ever, for over the course of the last month, President Trump has wreaked havoc on the international development space, withdrawing funding and dismantling long-standing international institutions. The harsh reality—that the US can no longer be relied on as an effective partner in delivering support to the areas that need it most—means that the UK must step up.

My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I firmly believe in global solutions to global problems. We believe in the power of international development in building a more peaceful, healthy and prosperous world. Cutting foreign aid is a failure not just to support the world’s poorest, but to uphold human rights, and it does not benefit us. The Liberal Democrats remain committed to spending 0.7% of GNI on aid, prioritising developments that help the most vulnerable and align with our strategic objectives, such as gender equality, human rights and access to HIV treatment and sexual health services. The fight against AIDS and HIV is far from over, but by working together and investing in testing, treatment, education and international co-operation, we can and will save lives.

Welfare of Doctors

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Tuesday 21st January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Peter Prinsley]

I agree that we must put resources into general practices to deal with the Government’s plan to move care from the hospital out into the community. I am sure that needs to be addressed.

The partnership model, which has served us so well, is now surely threatened as fewer young GPs are prepared to take on the responsibility or the financial risk of general practice.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for securing this important debate, which I feel could have been easily extended beyond a mere 30 minutes. On the pressure and responsibility for GPs looking to become partners, I cite the example of Silverdale practice in Burgess Hill in my constituency. In December and January, it had a problem with the sewers being blocked up, which resulted in contaminated water coming up into the surgery and car park. The point is that it has taken weeks to get support from the NHS; the pressure on those GP partners and practice managers must be huge. Does the hon. Member agree that there needs to be more support for GPs who are prepared to take on the responsibilities of a partnership?

[Peter Prinsley]

I do agree. I believe that the Government intend to do something about the somewhat terrible state of GP premises; the Health Secretary confirmed that only yesterday.

There are serious questions about the support that individual GPs receive, especially for mental health. At present, GPs rely on the NHS practitioner health service for addiction and mental health support.

Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Thursday 16th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

I thank the right hon. Member for Tatton (Esther McVey) for bringing forward this really important debate and for her excellent opening speech, which was very informative. In the interests of time, I will keep my remarks brief.

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency is tasked with vital work, and we all agree that it is there to protect and promote public health. As a number of Members have set out, it is concerning that despite the MHRA’s obvious importance, it clearly faces a number of challenges that need to be addressed. The Cumberlege review highlighted a conflict of interests, because the MHRA relies on fee income from pharmaceutical companies; as the hon. Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) said, this is a case of the agency marking its own homework. It is not a great way to set up its funding.

The hon. Member for Dewsbury and Batley (Iqbal Mohamed) made a really important point about Brexit, which is the elephant in the room. As with so many parts of our economy, Brexit caused major disruption to the pharmaceutical industry. Among other things, the loss of the prestigious European Medicines Agency from London to Amsterdam damaged trust in the UK’s pharmaceutical investment space.

[Danny Kruger]

Will the hon. Lady give way?

[Alison Bennett]

In the interests of time, I will not.

Brexit caused significant confusion for companies looking to sell products from Great Britain to Northern Ireland. It has also slowed down the time in which novel medicines and treatments can be approved for use, as pharmaceutical companies have understandably prioritised obtaining a single approval, allowing access to 27 markets via the EMA.

Meanwhile, strict affordability models imposed by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence mean that companies face a further hurdle before their products can reach patients. Again, that diminishes the attractiveness of the UK market post Brexit. To help address this issue, the MHRA introduced the international recognition procedure a year ago to streamline the authorisation process by incorporating assessments from trusted regulatory partners worldwide, including the EMA. However, that relies on those partners having already approved the products, so UK patients will inevitably still have access to medicines later than people in other countries, including EU member states. When I met representatives of Roche Diagnostics, based in Burgess Hill in my constituency, they told me about the industry’s serious concerns that the additional GB-specific conformity checks required could be prohibitively expensive and lead to significant delays.

As things stand, the forecast is looking gloomy. My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I are committed to addressing these issues head-on, and to helping the MHRA become world leading. First, we are pushing to expand the MHRA’s capacity by halving the time for treatments to reach patients suffering from illnesses such as cancer. Secondly, we encourage the Government to fully implement the recommendations of the Cumberlege review, including on compensation, corrective surgery and psychological support for those who were failed and who suffered from faulty devices and drugs. Thirdly—this is vital—the Government should actively seek a comprehensive mutual recognition agreement with the EMA to promote faster access to new and novel medicines and medical devices. That would reduce red tape, cost and friction, providing hope for those who need access to these lifesaving and life-enhancing medicines and devices.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.