National Care Service

Samantha Niblett Excerpts

Thursday 15th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

The reason I joined the Labour party—in my 30s, quite late—was the national health service and the welfare state, two incredibly important institutions in this country that look after people at their most vulnerable. After today, the national care service would be the third reason why I would join the Labour party. I mention that because in my South Derbyshire constituency, we saw the closure of the most beloved care home, Castle Court care home in Gresley, by the Reform-led county council. It was galling this week to see a couple of Reform county councillors celebrating the fact that the care home has been bought by a private company—hurrah for it coming in to save the day, by the way—when Reform was responsible for closing it, putting staff out of a job and residents out of a home. Does the Minister agree that it is only ever Labour Governments who create the institutions that look after people when they need help the most?

[Alison McGovern]

I thank my hon. Friend for that question, and through her, I thank all the people who campaigned for good care in her constituency. She tempts me; I am trying to be non-partisan today, and she is sparking my inner party-political fire. All of us, and all parties, can make a contribution to getting this right. We are rightly proud of the role of the Labour party in founding the NHS, and I want us to be just as proud of what we do to create the national care service from this point on.

Unpaid Carers

Samantha Niblett Excerpts

Thursday 15th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Barker.

I thank the hon. Member for Mid Sussex (Alison Bennett) for securing this debate and for succeeding me as the chair of the APPG for young carers and young adult carers. She knows that when we talk about unpaid carers, we must include young carers and young adult carers. We know that the number of young people under the age of 18 who care for a loved one or family member has increased; in fact, the amount of time for which those young carers care for a loved one has also increased significantly. The Carers Trust estimates that more than 50,000 children, young people and young adults in the UK provide more than 50 hours of unpaid care a week to their loved ones, and more than 3,000 children between five and nine take on heavy caring responsibilities.

In my role as APPG chair, along with the hon. Member for Mid Sussex, we are calling on the Government to consider three significant things. First, we must find ways to better recognise young carers. I speak regularly to young carers across my Harlow constituency, and many of them do not realise that they are young carers until they are much older; other MPs would say the same. Secondly, we have to look at how we train teachers. I will not reiterate the story I have told a number of times in this place, but as a teacher I missed that one of my students was a young carer until it came to parents evening, and that is always in my mind. Thirdly, we must ensure that all schools have a young carers lead.

I am pleased to hear from comments made by Ministers and MPs that the Government are listening and taking action to support our young carers and young adult carers. I ask the Government to think also about the transition from being a young carer. Sometimes, the person has got older and become an adult carer; sometimes, tragically, they stop having caring responsibilities for other reasons, such as bereavement. We need to think about how we support those young carers and adult carers if that is the case.

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for his dedication and commitment to young carers, though I know he does not support just young carers. He has the Neurological and Physical Abilitation centre in his constituency, and knows that one of my constituents, 11-year-old Alf, utilises that service. Alf’s mum, Emma, is an incredible advocate for her son and is desperately trying to get the support she needs. She gets 10 hours support for him during term time and 20 hours during the holidays, but Derbyshire county council has recently said no to any more support, including overnight care for just one day a week to help Emma to not reach breaking point. Although my hon. Friend is talking admirably about young carers, does he agree—perhaps the Minister will address this in responding to this brilliant debate—that the new national care service, which is coming in to support older people, should extend to support disabled children and unpaid carers so that they can get timely, flexible support, including overnight care where needed, to prevent parents and carers from reaching breaking point?

[Chris Vince]

I thank my hon. Friend for her contribution and for her visit to Harlow to see NAPA at first hand. I pay tribute to the work that NAPA does in my constituency. I am sorry to hear about the case of her constituent. I hope that she is able to lobby the county council and get the situation sorted. I hope also that the Minister and those who are introducing the national care service will consider what she said regarding support for disabled children. NAPA is a fantastic organisation but not everyone can afford or have access to that support. The difference NAPA has made to young people with cerebral palsy is significant. We can see the huge difference in their quality of life because of the support they get from NAPA. I thank my hon. Friend for raising that and pay tribute to David and all those who work at NAPA.

I also take this opportunity to pay tribute to some of the schools in my constituency, which do fantastic work to support young carers, particularly the Mark Hall school—I had the pleasure of inviting some of their young carers to Parliament—and Saint Nicholas school, as well as Purford Green primary school and many others. I ask that when the Government consider the national care service—I am so pleased the Prime Minister is incredibly committed to it—the important role of young carers and young adult carers is considered as part of the tapestry of carers, which obviously also includes adult carers and kinship carers. I hope that the national care service will provide support to all unpaid carers.

As hon. Members may be aware, I previously worked for a charity that supports young carers. That is part of the reason I am so passionate about this subject. To some extent, we have a postcode lottery when it comes to support for young carers and young adult carers. Often that support is provided by charities such as the one I worked for. If we are honest with ourselves, successive Governments have relied heavily on the charity sector because they have seen it as a cheaper option, but funding for charities is short term and not always consistent across the country. If the national care service is to get to the heart of the problem, it will address that issue. A previous Labour Prime Minister described charity as a “grey loveless thing”. I think we are in a very different place now, but we should not use charities because they are cheaper. We should work with charities because they have the expertise. We have mentioned some of those charities in this debate already.

Of course, caring for someone who we love can be a real honour. Often when I talk to carers and young carers they do not even think about being carers; they do it because they love that person and believe it to be the right thing to do. However, we must recognise that it can also be extremely challenging. I pay tribute to all unpaid carers in my constituency and beyond who absolutely deserve our thanks and admiration but also our support. The theme going through this debate is the need for action and not just words. After all, who cares for the carers?

Infants, Parents and Carers Bill

Samantha Niblett Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 4th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

The hon. Lady is right. Just as every pregnancy is different, every breastfeeding journey is also different. We do not want to put mothers in a position where all they have is Google at their fingertips at 2 o’clock in the morning, when the baby is devastated and will not feed, and they are worried that they are dehydrated. The National Breastfeeding Helpline, a 24/7 service funded by the Department of Health and Social Care, is an important resource and a lifeline for so many mothers—33,000 mothers call every month. It is also helpful to have peer support. If someone is in a room with other mothers who are saying, “I experience mastitis,” or “I experience thrush, and this is what I did to get past it. Keep going and come back next week and see if things are better,” that support can mean so much to a mother who feels like they are on their own in that journey.

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

The hon. Member is being incredibly generous with her time. I was delighted to contribute to her debate on infant feeding, and I thank her for her leadership on that. When we talk about the information and advice that is available to people, does she agree that one thing that can make a difference is the right person at the right time? I will not make this too much of a speech—I will include this when I get to speak—but the difference made by a midwife who arrives just at the moment when someone is prepared to give up can sometimes result in someone’s daughter acquiring the middle name of that midwife, just as my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) said.

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

I thank the hon. Lady for her contribution. She raises an important point, namely that infant feeding is not taught generically across medical professions. For example, a lot of mothers may present at their GP surgery if they are having challenges, but their GP is probably not the best placed person to inform them on how they can best be supported on their infant feeding journey, whatever that looks like. Advice from specialists, such as midwives and most health visitors, means that people are being supported, asking the right questions and getting the right answers.

Breastfeeding strengthens babies’ immune systems and significantly reduces the risk of infections, obesity, asthma and long-term conditions such as type-2 diabetes. I pay tribute to Her Grace the Duchess of Richmond for convening a Goodwood health summit to specifically look at the infant gut microbiome, and at how important it is in those formative days of pregnancy and the first few critical weeks of life, and for her continued advocacy in that space. For mothers, breastfeeding lowers the risk of breast and ovarian cancers, cardiovascular disease, and supports post-natal mental health. Providing support for breastfeeding mothers can pay for itself further down the line by improving the health of babies and mothers.

Currently the UK has no national infant feeding strategy, timebound action plan, multisectoral infant feeding committee, or overall national co-ordinator. There is little-to-no mention of infant feeding in health professional training, and no co-ordinated strategy for infant feeding in emergency situations. I hope that the Bill will provide the foundation for such support to return to levels that we have seen in the past, and address gaps that have always existed. Babies and their parents deserve better, and I look forward to supporting the Bill through its passage through the House, including in Committee.

Puberty Blockers

Samantha Niblett Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

Everyone should have the right of access to high-quality, evidence-based healthcare, whatever their age. At the heart of this debate are young people experiencing profound gender-related distress, and the families who support them. Too often they have found themselves caught in the middle of a political argument while facing long waits, uncertainty, and a lack of clear treatment options. Every young person deserves compassionate, evidence-based care, and that includes transgender young people and children with gender incongruence.

The irony of the Opposition motion is that it would stop the very research that many Members have argued is necessary before decisions about treatment can be made. If we are serious about evidence-based medicine, we must also be serious about gathering evidence. The Pathways trial follows a recommendation made by Baroness Cass in her independent review, a recommendation that had enjoyed cross-party support when it was published. Since then the trial has undergone extensive scrutiny by researchers, ethics committees, independent reviewers and regulators. Following further modifications and additional safeguards, it has been approved by both the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency and the Health Research Authority. If Members believe that more evidence is needed, surely they should support a process that is designed to produce that evidence.

Much has been said about risk, and of course risk must be taken seriously, but the answer to uncertainty cannot simply be to refuse to learn more. The answer is careful, closely monitored research with robust protections. Participants must have experienced gender incongruence for at least two years, must already be receiving NHS gender services, must have undergone psychosocial support, and must be assessed as being physically and mentally stable. Both the young people and their parents must consent, and every participant must be approved by clinicians and a national multidisciplinary team. This is not an uncontrolled experiment; it is a tightly regulated clinical trial operating under some of the highest standards of oversight that are available in modern medicine.

The hon. Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) made a valid point about the need to ensure that children who realise that they are gay do not decide that they are transgender, and that we do not feel that we should push more gay people back into the closet, as they are feeling very much under threat at present. However, there is another risk that we must discuss, and that is inaction. For two years, puberty blockers have effectively been unavailable outside research settings. Young people and their families have been told repeatedly that more evidence is needed, and now, when a trial designed to generate that evidence is ready to proceed, some seek to stop it. What message does that send?

Behind every statistic is a family. Parents of transgender children and children with gender incongruence often speak of the distress of watching their child struggle and feeling powerless to help. They see anxiety, fear and growing distress as their child experiences physical changes that can feel deeply uncomfortable and alienating. These families are not political talking points; they are looking for support, answers and hope. For many transgender young people, puberty itself can be a source of profound distress. We should not pretend that doing nothing is a neutral act, because delays, uncertainty and the absence of treatment options have consequences too. Puberty blockers have generally been understood as a reversible intervention intended to pause puberty and provide time for further assessment and support, and the purpose of this trial is to strengthen our understanding of both the benefits and the risks. If opponents argue that more evidence is needed, blocking the research that would provide that evidence is a contradiction that this House should reject.

I also want to address something that often sits beneath debates such as this. If you come to this debate from the position that transgender people do not exist or that it is a fad, you are mistaken. Transgender people have always existed, and they deserve the same dignity, compassion and evidence-based healthcare as anyone else. If, as I believe we all do, we come to the debate motivated by concern for children’s safety and wellbeing, how can we say that we are protecting children while being comfortable with them living in fear of the changes that puberty may bring? How can we say that we are acting in their best interests when some young people are terrified of growing into an adult body that does not align with who they understand themselves to be, while parents watch helplessly from the sideline? If our goal is to truly safeguard children, we should support careful research, rigorous oversight and evidence-based medicine. We should seek answers, not prevent them. We should reduce uncertainty, not prolong it. That is why this trial should proceed.

Women’s Health Strategy

Samantha Niblett Excerpts

Thursday 16th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Karin Smyth]

My hon. Friend again raises younger women’s voices; we want to continue to hear from them. Part of this strategy is about working with the Department for Education to ensure that girls—and indeed boys—are made more aware of some of these issues. The women’s voices partnership—my apologies for not quite being able to remember its name earlier—will bring women together, including younger women and girls. If her constituent is keen to be one of those advocates, we would welcome that. We are talking about having new patient-reported experience measures and patient-reported outcome measures; we will develop those pathways over the years. Through that, women will have clear ways to navigate the system, and to put their voices forward.

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

I thank the Ministers for this renewed women’s health strategy for England. Two of my constituents in particular—Evie Solomon, who founded HER Circle, and Shelly Lynn—will welcome the focus on medical misogyny, and they will be watching to make sure that we deliver. It was great to hear that there were influencers at the launch of the strategy yesterday. I met one of them, Milly Evans, who is a sex educator. Is there space in the women’s health strategy and the men’s health strategy for the provision of lifelong sex education, so that we have consistent, relevant and appropriate sex education for everyone who needs it? Frankly, women who have health issues still want a fulfilling and happy sex life.

[Karin Smyth]

As I said, part of this strategy is about educating girls and boys on health and bringing together all parts of education. We are keen to work in new ways with new media, and with influencers who are positive about women and women’s health, and we will continue to do so.

NHS Federated Data Platform

Samantha Niblett Excerpts

Thursday 16th April 2026 Westminster Hall

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Dame Siobhain. I am grateful for the opportunity to raise this issue, because my constituents in South Derbyshire, like millions of NHS patients across the country, deserve honest answers about who holds their most private data, and why.

The federated data platform is, in principle, exactly the kind of innovation that can help to transform our NHS: it could connect fragmented data across trusts, reduce discharge delays and cut cancer diagnosis times. Those are goals that every Member of this House can support. The question before us today is not whether we want a modern, data-driven NHS—we do—but whether Palantir is the right company to deliver that.

The £330 million contract was awarded to Palantir to deliver the FDP, but its co-founder, Peter Thiel, has been openly hostile to the very idea of the NHS. Should a company of that character be trusted as a custodian of the intimate health records of tens of millions of British citizens? I do not dismiss the technology itself—the platform is genuinely impressive—but we cannot separate a company from its leadership. The Health Secretary himself has acknowledged that the “political views and…outlook” of Palantir’s founders and bosses are

“well off to the right”

of even the official Opposition—or the party that likes to think of itself as the official Opposition. When the co-founder of a company holds our NHS in open contempt, and when its chief executive is a prominent ally of an Administration that this House has repeatedly criticised, it is entirely reasonable to ask whether that company should occupy such a sensitive position at the heart of our public health infrastructure. This is not about ideology; it is scrutiny, which is precisely what this House is here to provide.

We also know that when the contract was first published, 417 of its 586 pages were completely blanked out, and it took a legal challenge from the Good Law Project to force the release of a substantially redacted version. That is not the transparency that the public have the right to expect. If we want NHS staff and patients to embrace a digital future, that future cannot be built on a foundation that they do not trust.

Oral Answers to Questions

Samantha Niblett Excerpts

Tuesday 14th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Tom Rutland (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Lab)]

10. What steps his Department is taking to reduce the number of people waiting for NHS treatment.

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

19. What steps his Department is taking to reduce the number of people waiting for NHS treatment.

[The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Wes Streeting)]

We inherited from the Conservatives an NHS facing the worst crisis in its history, with waiting lists at a record 7.6 million and public satisfaction at record lows. This Labour Government are getting the NHS back on its feet and making it fit for the future. We have delivered record numbers of appointments, tests and surgeries. Since we took office, waiting lists have been down to the lowest level in nearly three and a half years, and we are driving modernisation through our 10-year plan. Lots has been done, but there is so much more to do with a Labour Government.

[Wes Streeting]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for all the work he is doing, including with our Labour team in Worthing, to improve the health of people across his constituency. I congratulate staff at University Hospitals Sussex on the progress that they have made in bringing waiting lists down. To help them to go further, I am delighted to announce that my hon. Friend’s local community diagnostic centre in Southlands hospital will benefit from a new multimillion-pound MRI scanner to drive down waiting times, including for MSK patients. We are combining investment with modernisation to send crack teams of top clinicians to MSK community services, drive down waiting times and improve outcomes. That is the difference that a Labour Government make.

[Samantha Niblett]

Recently, University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS foundation trust took part in the Q4 sprint, which involved out-patient appointments and surgical procedures. The work focused mainly on areas such as gynaecology, trauma and orthopaedics, general surgery, and ear, nose and throat, reflecting where that trust’s waiting lists are longest. We have seen a significant drop in the 18-week position, which apparently is a key marker of overall access to care. At the start of the sprint, around 56% of patients were being treated within 18 weeks; as of last week, that figure had increased to 60.2%. A lot of work has been done, so will the Secretary of State join me and the chief executive officer, Stephen Posey, in thanking the teams involved in helping to deliver that sprint? More importantly, what assurances can he give that this is not just a one-off? We have people in South Derbyshire and across the country who need consistently good and quick care.

Healthcare in Rural Areas

Samantha Niblett Excerpts

Wednesday 4th March 2026 Westminster Hall

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

Thank you, Dr Huq—it is a pleasure to serve under your chairship. I am really grateful to the hon. Member for Mid Bedfordshire (Blake Stephenson)—I will call him my hon. Friend; we were in the armed forces parliamentary scheme together—for the opportunity to speak in this important debate on healthcare in rural areas.

In my constituency, we are proud of our strong sense of community, but too many of my constituents face growing barriers when it comes to accessing healthcare. For many residents, the first challenge is distance: GP surgeries are fewer and farther between, community hospitals have been hollowed out, and public transport is limited or unreliable. When appointments are moved online or centralised miles away, what is described as efficiency can feel more like exclusion, and older residents, carers and those without access to a car are too often left struggling.

Rural practices find it harder to attract and retain GPs, nurses and allied health professionals. Smaller patient lists and higher operating costs make practices less financially viable, placing additional strain on already overstretched staff. The result is longer waiting times, fewer appointments and growing frustration for patients who simply want timely care close to home.

Those pressures are compounded by wider inequalities. Rural communities tend to have older populations and higher levels of chronic illness, yet funding formulas do not always reflect the true cost of delivering care across a large, sparsely populated area. It is also worth mentioning that South Derbyshire has a high number of falls, which accounts for a large proportion of emergency hospital admissions for people over 65, and has other negative consequences such as impacting people’s confidence and their sense of independence. Mental health services are also particularly patchy, leaving many people waiting far too long for support, if they can access it at all.

Tracey Thorneloe, one of my constituents in South Derbyshire, experiences debilitating pelvic girdle pain as part of a chronic health condition. While pelvic girdle pain is normally experienced during pregnancy or childbirth, she began experiencing this pain six years ago and has had great difficulty accessing physio. There are no specialist physios for her condition in South Derbyshire, and access to hydrotherapy is very limited.

Wheelchair provision is also an ongoing issue in my constituency. My constituent Amanda Storer has told me of her year-long battle to get a wheelchair for her son Derrick, who has Down’s syndrome. A wheelchair allows him to be more independent and allows Amanda to get out and about more as he grows. We have helped her as much as we can, but we have been struggling too.

All that does not have to be the case; with the right investment and planning, rural healthcare can thrive. We need fairer funding that properly reflects rural need, stronger incentives to recruit and retain healthcare professionals in rural areas, and a renewed commitment to community-based services. Digital healthcare has a role to play, but it must complement, rather than replace, face-to-face provision.

Puberty Suppressants Trial

Samantha Niblett Excerpts

Wednesday 17th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call Samantha Niblett for a short question.

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

Trans people do not wake up at 18 suddenly trans; it starts before then. When we talk about protecting children, it means protecting trans children so that they can transition into adulthood knowing that they had parents and doctors who advocated for their needs. But this trial is not a prison sentence, so will the Secretary of State talk about whether people are entitled to withdraw from it if they change their mind?

[Wes Streeting]

They certainly can, and if they withdraw, they will still get the wider therapeutic support they deserve.

Budget Resolutions

Samantha Niblett Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

I begin by thanking the Chancellor for the incredibly important steps that she has taken in the Budget. Five hundred and ten people in my constituency of South Derbyshire who spent their lives working in the mining industry—people who helped power our nation—will now receive a significant uplift in their BCSSS pension each month. That is life-changing support.

I also welcome the measures that will lift 2,020 children in South Derbyshire out of poverty. That is not an abstract number; those are real families, who will now have a fairer start and a future with more opportunities than struggles. From next April, households will see energy bills fall by £150. At a time when every pound matters, that will make a direct difference to people’s lives. I also thank the Chancellor for maintaining a clear and unwavering focus on fixing our NHS, because the health of our nation is the foundation of our prosperity.

Many of the Budget’s measures will be felt in rural and semi-rural constituencies such as mine, and by farming families, who often feel overlooked. I am grateful for the specific concession that mitigates the impact of changes to inheritance tax for married farming couples. That is a welcome change following 13 months of campaigning by many, including farmers, the National Farmers’ Union and the Labour Rural Research Group, of which I am a proud member.

However, although there is much to commend, I must also be honest: for all the good that this Budget does—and it does a lot—many farmers in my constituency simply cannot see past the broader inheritance tax changes. They remember that Labour promised no such changes before the general election and that our manifesto declared that food is the first line of defence, yet right now this country has just six days’ worth of food supplies. With global tensions rising and instability growing even closer to home in Europe, we should be doing everything possible to support the very people who help keep Britain fed.

Most farmers are not wealthy land barons; they live hand to mouth on tiny and sometimes non-existent profit margins. Many were explicitly advised not to hand over their farms to their children, and they now face enormous and unexpected tax bills. For some, that means selling off land; for others, it means delaying or abandoning plans to diversify—precisely the type of innovation we should be encouraging. I look forward to the forthcoming report by Baroness Batters, and I hope the Government take it seriously, because we must acknowledge a difficult truth: we have lost the trust of our farmers and they deserve, now more than ever, our utmost respect, our honesty and our unwavering support.

For farmers who are elderly or terminally ill, the anti-forestalling clause in the inheritance tax policy is creating a level of distress and strain that cannot be overstated. As the Prime Minister has previously said:

“If somebody makes powerful representations, then my instinct is to consider what’s being said. Getting it right is more important than ploughing on with a package which doesn’t necessarily achieve the desired outcome.”

While I welcome this Budget, I plead with the Government to look again at APR and inheritance tax for farmers.