LGBT+ History Month

Debate between Sarah Owen and Nia Griffith
Thursday 13th February 2025

(1 month, 3 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Nia Griffith Portrait Dame Nia Griffith
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank my hon. Friend for mentioning a very, very personal experience of the terrible losses we saw in the 1980s and 1990s. He is absolutely right. From those very first moments, when we were perhaps fearful to be the first person to wear the red ribbon on 1 December, we can now hopefully combat that stigma. But we know there is still a lot to do worldwide to combat stigma and ensure people get the treatments that are available.

Last week, I had the privilege to visit Fast Track Cymru in Cardiff and hear about the innovative work it is doing to eradicate the transmission of HIV, including the test and post service now available in Wales.

Before I move on to issues relating to trans and gender-questioning youth, I am sure I do not need to remind Members of my earlier words urging measured, considered and respectful debate. I am pleased to confirm that NHS England has opened three children and young people’s gender services, in the north-west, London and Bristol. The services operate under an innovative model and embed multidisciplinary teams in specialist children’s hospitals. The services have begun seeing patients from the national waiting list. A fourth service will open in the east of England in spring. NHS England remains on schedule to deliver a gender clinic in each region of England by 2026.

On puberty blockers, I am aware of the views of many on the subject and how sensitive it can be. In March last year, NHS England took the decision not to commission the routine use of puberty blockers for the treatment of gender incongruence, informed by an evidence review conducted by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. The findings were echoed in the Cass review and in accompanying systematic reviews conducted by the University of York, which found insufficient evidence to support the safety or clinical effectiveness of puberty blockers for adolescents. There is a clear time for this order to be reviewed in 2027. Better-quality evidence is critical if the NHS is to provide reliable transparent information and advice to support children and young people, and their parents and carers, in making potentially life-changing decisions. That is why we are supporting NHS England to set up a study into the impacts of puberty-suppressing hormones as a treatment option for children and young people with gender incongruence. The trial aims to begin recruiting participants in spring 2025.

On education, as many are aware, before venturing into politics I was, by profession, a comprehensive school teacher. Back in the ’80s, section 28, introduced into law by the then Conservative Government, banned the “promotion of homosexuality” or

“the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship.”

In the classroom, if a pupil was verbally being hateful or discriminatory towards one of their peers, I did not want it to go unchallenged but found myself just telling them not to use such language or risk upsetting someone. Anything more explicit could have been potentially promoting homosexuality and breaking the law, and risked me losing my job. I did not protect those pupils who were the object of such comments in the way that they should have been protected. I should have done more. Today, the notion that an LGBT+ family is pretend is absurd to most. Nowadays, it is not uncommon to find same-sex parents picking up their children from school.

Sarah Owen Portrait Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

I appreciate the Minister’s apology, but to have taken such a stance would have meant her losing her job. Although we can always reflect and do better in hindsight, we have to be kind to ourselves and give ourselves the space to be able to see the grace in ourselves as well.

Nia Griffith Portrait Dame Nia Griffith
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank my hon. Friend for her very kind comments on the issue.

Even today, it does not mean that there are no challenges. Coming out, particularly to family or classmates, is still challenging and scary, with all the worry of how it might be perceived and the fear of bullying.

In 2018, the previous Government introduced LGBT+ people into the relationships, sex and health education curriculum. The reality of diverse family types would, in stark contrast to section 28, be taught as a fact of life in modern Britain. As the House is aware, the RSHE and gender-questioning pupil guidance is currently under review. The Government are engaging with stakeholders, including parents, teachers and pupils. The Government are also drawing from the available evidence, including the Cass review, to finalise the guidance. As the Secretary of State for Education, my right hon. Friend the Member for Houghton and Sunderland South (Bridget Phillipson), said in her first month in office, children’s wellbeing must be at the heart of any decisions on RSHE and gender-questioning guidance.

Another area I wish to touch on today is LGBT+ veterans and personnel in the armed forces. In 2021, Falklands veteran Major General Alastair Bruce married his husband in full military regalia. It was celebrated in regional and national media, yet when he joined the Army in 1979 it was illegal to be both LGBT+ and a member of our armed forces. As a result, the general was forced to hide part of himself for decades just to be afforded the right to serve his country. It was not until 2000 that that harmful policy was rectified, so that ability, not identity, determines if one is able to serve their country. In 2023, Lord Etherton delivered the results and recommendations of his independent review into the period of the ban on LGBT+ personnel. Just this week, at an event to mark 25 years since its lifting, I heard some of the harrowing stories of those affected by that ban.

The Government are committed to delivering in full the recommendations of Lord Etherton’s review. Only last month, the winning design for a new LGBT+ memorial for armed forces personnel was unveiled, soon to be housed at the National Arboretum. In December, the Ministry of Defence detailed to the House a financial redress scheme that seeks to acknowledge the consequences of the ban. The Government have increased the financial redress scheme from the original £50 million allocated by the previous Government to £75 million, an increase of 50%. I strongly urge any eligible veterans from that time to contact the scheme as soon as they are able.

More widely, 10 years ago the United Kingdom was ranked as the No. 1 nation in Europe for LGBT+ rights, protections and safety. The UK was a global example not only of acceptance but opportunity. But 10 years of subsequent Conservative Governments has undermined that achievement. From shelving their own LGBT action plan to the embarrassing boycott of their own international LGBT conference and the flip-flopping and delays on banning conversion practices, the Conservative party slid backwards towards the politics of division. This Government aim to reverse that trend. The UK is proud to defend the human rights of LGBT+ people at home and around the world. We are proud members of the Equal Rights Coalition, which is an intergovernmental organisation dedicated to the protection of rights for LGBT+ people. The UK believes that human rights are universal and apply equally to all people. That includes those who are LGBT+, who are some of the most systematically persecuted individuals in the world. Currently, 63 countries criminalise consensual same-sex acts, 13 can impose the death penalty, and at least 49 use legislation to criminalise or harass transgender and gender-diverse people.

The criminalisation of LGBT+ people often stems from colonial-era legislation, much of it imposed by the UK itself. These laws uphold outdated views that undermine the rights of LGBT+ people. They were wrong then, and they are wrong now. Our network of more than 280 diplomatic missions works to tackle discrimination and end the violence and persecution that persist today. Our £40 million programme is helping to improve political, social and economic empowerment by addressing outdated, discriminatory laws, promoting protective legislation, enabling civil society organisations, and supporting the most vulnerable LGBT+ people in conflict and crisis.

Today I have shared the Government’s commitments in detail. This Government stand ready to deliver for LGBT+ people, ending the dithering of recent years and lowering the temperature of toxic debate. Let me end by saying, as part of the LGBT+ community myself and as the Minister for Equalities, that it is a privilege to open this debate, and I look forward to the contributions of Members on both sides of the House.

Misuse of Fireworks Bill

Debate between Sarah Owen and Nia Griffith
2nd reading
Friday 21st January 2022

(3 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Misuse of Fireworks Bill 2021-22 View all Misuse of Fireworks Bill 2021-22 Debates Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Sarah Owen Portrait Sarah Owen
- Hansard - -

I wholeheartedly agree. This is not just about the noise of the fireworks, but also the unplanned and unexpected nature of them, which really impacts communities.

The testimony I read out has stuck with me. As a mum of a toddler, I know that disturbing a child’s sleep—or, for that matter, a parent’s—is no joke. The fireworks around us in Luton are sometimes so loud that my daughter’s baby monitor lights up red. That is with double glazing and all windows and doors shut. Many of us will know that the next day with a young child who has not had a full night’s sleep is absolutely no fun at all—it is not a fate I would wish on even my strongest opponents here.

Many colleagues will also be pet owners. Luckily, my dog Herman is a fairly chilled out chap when it comes to fireworks, but I have had reports from pet owners in Luton where the impact of the fireworks on their pets has turned their household upside down. Their beloved animals are scared, fearful and shaken, even after the noises have stopped.

A 2021 report by Cats Protection found that 63% of cats in the UK are negatively affected by fireworks. Cats can presume themselves to be in danger from sudden bursts of light and loud noise. In response to a threat to their safety, cats often bolt out of the house and put themselves in danger of traffic or get lost beyond their owner’s reach. That is of course devastating for the owner, but if a cat thinks its life is in danger, nothing can get in its way.

For dogs too, continuous fireworks can cause long-term stress, as we have heard, which can lead to behavioural problems and heartbreaking health consequences. As I said earlier, constituents have reported their pets shaking, crying and even having seizures long after the bangs have stopped.

Lowering the legal decibel level for fireworks does not solve that problem alone. What I am proposing today is a positive start for legislative change. Our domestic and wild animals need tighter laws around when fireworks can be licensed to be displayed and sold. If restricted to only be sold around permitted celebrations, such as fireworks night, new year’s eve, Diwali, Eid and the lunar new year, people with mental health issues, parents and pet owners can at least make preparations to minimise the impact of fireworks.

There must also be a review into who is permitted a licence to sell fireworks. Currently, retailers do not need a licence to sell around the celebration days I have mentioned. A review must also look into who is permitted to set off fireworks. Some stakeholders such as the Dogs Trust urge the Government to limit fireworks licensing to organised public displays only, with local authority approval. Currently, there is no legal requirement to have a licence for setting off consumer fireworks in the UK. Literally anyone can set off some rockets and a Catherine wheel in their garden with no training and no safety requirements. Surely that cannot be right.

Unfortunately, there are also people who deliberately misuse fireworks to cause harm and distress to others, which is completely unacceptable. That is why I have called for tougher minimum fines in my Bill. We know that the toughest sentences for misusing fireworks are very rarely used. A fixed penalty charge notice just does not cut it as a deterrent or a punishment when fireworks can often cost many hundreds of pounds, and it does not reflect the negative impact on our communities.

There is another group who have spoken to us who are severely impacted by noisy and reckless fireworks: veterans. I have no idea what traumas they have lived through, although some Members of this House will know. Their service to our country in volatile war zones can leave them with post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression or a combination of mental health problems. Servicemen and women can experience heightened stress at times of the year when fireworks intensify, such as on bonfire night. The sudden flashes and bangs of fireworks can bring back memories of the horrors of war. After all they have enduring in their courageous work, that is simply not another terror they should or need to experience.

My hon. Friend the Member for Luton South (Rachel Hopkins) found discarded boxes of fireworks during a campaign session. They had names such as “Rain of Terror”, “Big Bomb” and “All Out War”, which shows that many fireworks are not marketed as something beautiful, but as something loud, and something to be scared of.

At key times of celebration, veterans can make plans to avoid fireworks displays to protect their mental or physical health. However, in places where fireworks are a regular occurrence all year round, they can find themselves in a constant state of anxiety. Combat Stress told me:

“We see a higher rate of distress in veterans accessing our services in November.

Not only is it challenging because of the grief surrounding Armistice, but the sound and sudden unexpected bangs of fireworks can be reminders of frontline combat where they were exposed to the horrors of war in service to this country.

Firework displays bring people together and create a lot of joy for spectators. We don’t want to ruin anyone’s fun but we urge the public to understand how distressing noisy fireworks can be for military veterans.”

Nia Griffith Portrait Nia Griffith (Llanelli) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I really applaud my hon. Friend for choosing misuse of fireworks as the subject of her Bill. The measures that she wishes to bring in would be absolutely fantastic, so I hope that she will have Government support. Does she agree with me that, together with those measures, an education campaign is needed to put the word out about how dreadfully people can be affected?

Sarah Owen Portrait Sarah Owen
- Hansard - -

I wholeheartedly agree. I think that people do not fully understand the impact of fireworks, the changes that have been made to them and how loud they have become. If many people understood what a particular decibel level was and the impact that it would have on the wider radius of their neighbourhood or community, they would perhaps think twice about using them.

I hope that none of us will make a judgment that the veterans charity Combat Stress—or any other organisation that has expressed concerns about fireworks in support of our brave and struggling members of the forces—is trying to ruin anyone’s fun. As I have said, the measures that I suggest in this Bill are common-sense reforms that also show compassion to veterans who have already been through unimaginable trauma.

Of course, it is not only ex-servicemen and women who suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. Mental health problems are experienced by people from all backgrounds; as a society, we are gradually beginning to recognise how we can adapt to their needs and show sensitivity. I just want to share one example. During the recent lockdowns, in Northwell in Luton North we had some community clear-up days. Neighbours went door to door to involve people in those clear-up days, and there was one house with a garden that was terribly overgrown. They had never seen the person living there come out of the house. Deniece Dobson, who was running that community clear-up and has been an absolute stalwart and leading light of it, knocked on the door—it was somebody who lives four or five doors away from her—and it was the home of a veteran who was suffering from PTSD. She could not go out; she said how distressing the fireworks had been. I am so grateful to Deniece and all the people around her and in that community who took the time and made the effort to clear up and to get to know their neighbour. But to hear that fireworks were having such an impact on someone who served our country was truly worrying.