Neuroendocrine Cancer

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Thursday 16th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

I am grateful for the opportunity to bring this vital issue to the House. The term neuroendocrine cancer may not be familiar to many, but tens of thousands of people across the United Kingdom have had to educate themselves after receiving a diagnosis. As with any rare cancer, this is often an uphill struggle marked by delays, misdiagnosis and a persistent struggle for visibility in our healthcare system.

Hon. Members, possibly including the Minister, will have heard me make this point before: a cancer being considered rare does not stop it from impacting many thousands of people right across the UK. Indeed, about 6,000 people are diagnosed with neuroendocrine cancer each year in the UK, which works out at roughly one person every 90 minutes. Today, more than 36,000 people in the UK are living with the condition. To put that into perspective, it is now more prevalent than stomach or pancreatic cancer. The rate of growth is incredibly alarming. Between 1995 and 2018, the incidence of neuroendocrine cancer increased by a staggering 371%. This is not a niche health concern; it is a rapidly growing challenge that our NHS must be equipped to meet.

Statistics can often feel abstract in the Chamber, which is why I want to share the story of a meeting I recently held with three neuroendocrine cancer patients, Liz, Carolyn and Craig, at my office in Fountainbridge in Edinburgh South West. Their stories were both moving and illuminating. We have just been talking about modernising the House of Commons. Given that that meeting took place just four weeks ago, I find it incredible that in four weeks I can meet someone, request a debate and then have that debate, with my favourite Minister answering my questions—it restores my faith in democracy.

Craig, whom I met that day, is in the unique and challenging position of being both a professional advocate and a patient himself. He and the others I met expressed immense gratitude for the care they eventually received, describing it as nothing short of fantastic once they were in the right hands. However, they also spoke about the exhausting battle it took to access specialists who properly understood their condition. They described a system where specialist doctors and centres of excellence are too often hidden behind a wall of referral delays and low clinical awareness. That is particularly in evidence in Scotland, where patients currently face the worst waiting times since records began, but it is also true—albeit possibly to a lesser extent—in our health systems south of the border and in Wales and Northern Ireland.

One of the most powerful parts of our conversation centred on a symptom that is often difficult to discuss yet utterly debilitating: the frequent and urgent need to access a toilet. This is not a minor inconvenience but a symptom that robs people of their autonomy and their dignity. They spoke of how that invisible burden prevents many patients from working, from attending social events and even from leaving their homes for long periods of time. It is a barrier to a normal, fulfilling life.

They also brought a message of hope regarding the drug telotristat. They described how that treatment has quite literally given them back their lives. By managing the symptoms and stopping the cycle of incontinence, the drug has allowed them to return to work, to contribute to their communities, to pay their taxes—that is quite important—and, most importantly, to enjoy a fulfilling family life. This is a clear example of where the right medication does not just treat a disease but restores a person’s dignity and their place in society. It is a powerful reminder that when we invest in the right treatments and pathways, the system burden is reduced because patients are empowered to live independently.

Despite those successes, the single biggest driver of poor outcomes remains the time it takes to get the initial diagnosis. At a meeting I attended at the Royal College of General Practitioners in December, bringing together UK-based healthcare professionals involved in trials, patient care and leading research into neuroendocrine cancer, I heard that, on average, it takes four-and-a-half years for a patient with a tumour to be correctly diagnosed. During that time, the average patient visits their GP 11 times.

Because the cancers can occur anywhere in the body and the symptoms are often non-specific, they are frequently dismissed as more common conditions such as irritable bowel syndrome, asthma, the menopause or anxiety. I hope somebody somewhere is taking a list of all the conditions that get confused with menopause, because I think it is quite a long one. Many patients, including the three who came to visit my office, look perfectly well, even while harbouring the disease. The consequences are severe, however. Over half of all patients are diagnosed at stage 3 or 4, when treatment options are more limited and the cost to the NHS is significantly higher. Neuroendocrine Cancer UK estimates that it costs between £200,000 and £300,000 more per patient when treating at a later stage rather than at an early one.

Currently, the UK has 13 accredited centres of excellence, including a specialist team in Edinburgh and an accredited centre in Glasgow. Those hubs deliver multidisciplinary, evidence-based care that is proven to improve survival rates—yet access remains a postcode lottery. Whether a patient is in rural Scotland or in a coastal town in England, the quality of care they receive should not depend on whether their local hospital happens to have a neuroendocrine lead. In Scotland we see a stark divide between our urban hubs and our rural communities, whereas in England the access issue is more related to the divergent priorities of different cancer alliances. In both cases, patients suffer because we do not have a standardised diagnostic pathway for everyone.

The closest we have to a standardised service, which all neuroendocrine patients can access, is the one that is offered by Neuroendocrine Cancer UK. It provides a critical safety net, offering helplines, counselling and peer support, and it regularly steps up to fund the small-scale, early-stage studies or trials that are needed to get research off the ground. It is sobering that 95% of Neuroendocrine Cancer UK’s income comes from community generosity. It delivers system-critical services that support the NHS, yet it does so with almost no statutory resourcing.

In closing, I ask the Minister to address five specific priority areas. The first is clinical awareness. May we embed neuroendocrine cancer into primary care training and early diagnosis initiatives to stop these patients being lost in the system for years, perhaps reducing the number of GP appointments needed before a diagnosis?

The second area is clear pathways. As I mentioned previously, we need to tackle the postcode lottery when it comes to treatment, and the only way to do that is through a nationally recognised diagnostic and referral pathway to centres of excellence. Will that be considered?

The third area is the guidance gap. Currently, the NG12 guidance is critical to cancer diagnoses in England and Wales. Neuroendocrine cancer is not included in that guidance. May we review whether there could be a way to include it?

The fourth area is data and visibility. Neuroendocrine-specific cancer data is not routinely published. We need that to accurately track the incredible rate at which cases are rising and our response to that. May we also ensure that more data is published more regularly?

The fifth area is research equity. The issue of funding for research into rare cancers was one of the key asks that charities raised with me when I was consulting on my Bill, which is now the Rare Cancers Act 2026. What more can we do to ensure that the Government are using all the mechanisms at their disposal to stimulate research in this rare cancer and all the others that currently fall through the cracks of major funding streams?

In summary, earlier recognition, clearer routes to specialist care and access to life-changing drugs have the protentional to transform outcomes. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s plans to make that a reality.

Puberty Blockers Clinical Trial

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Monday 23rd March 2026 Westminster Hall

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

I believe that a trial for puberty blockers is necessary, and I am hopeful that the issues raised between the MHRA and King’s College can be resolved to allow the PATHWAYS trial to go ahead. If not, I hope an alternative trial can be proposed. I believe that if we accept that trans people exist and have rights, which I think—or at least hope—everyone here does, such trials are a natural consequence.

I understand the concerns the people here and outside this place have about the long-term medical impacts of puberty blockers. That is why we should act cautiously and it is why a trial is needed. We cannot possibly understand the short or long-term impacts without studying puberty blockers properly. The PATHWAYS trial came about because of a lack of conclusive evidence on the use of those drugs. The answer is not to allow their legal use again, but to undertake a trial into their benefits and consequences.

Not long ago in my constituency, I met the parents of a trans woman. Their daughter struggled significantly with her mental health during her teenage years. At one point, she was hospitalised due to complications from a severe eating disorder, which was driven by her decision to reduce her calorie intake because she thought that would delay puberty. Her parents have told me that they believe a big cause of her issues was her inability to express her true gender identity. They have no doubt that puberty blockers would have saved her from some of the anguish that she has experienced. While I know life is not always easy for her, my constituent’s daughter has since medically and socially transitioned; she lives openly as a woman and is happier as a result.

That story shows the profound impact that a struggle with gender identity can have on a young person. It is offensive to talk about young people simply needing love, to talk about trials being experiments, or to suggest that taking part would be an impulsive decision by anyone. People talk about trying to moderate language; we have a duty to bring people together on this topic, not create division.

Eating Disorders Awareness Week

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Thursday 26th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

You will not be surprised to hear that it is a pleasure to serve under you in the Chair, Ms Vaz.

I thank the hon. Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) for the way she introduced the debate and for her leadership of the APPG on eating disorders. I join her in thanking Hope Virgo for all the work that she does. In many ways, eating disorders can be a hidden condition—even a secretive condition—but Hope really does give the topic the publicity that otherwise it would not get. Hope has been through a lot, and I would not wish what she has been through on anyone, but we are lucky that she is the campaigner she is.

[Wera Hobhouse]

It is also worth mentioning the many people who have come forward to bravely tell their stories, raise awareness and take away the stigma. We know how much courage it takes to come forward. I want to collectively thank everybody who does that. We need more people to come forward and talk about their experiences, but I thank everybody who has come forward.

[Dr Arthur]

Absolutely. I do not attend the APPG as much as I should, but when I do people tell amazingly personal stories about what has happened to them, not only as survivors but as people who have lost loved ones. It can be very emotional for people, but it is important that we share the stories and experiences. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West (Mr Quigley), because he has been a fantastic champion in the House of Commons. I am surprised that he is not here, but I expect he has a good reason. Maybe he is watching.

I want to focus on the role of community. We are trying through the APPG to create a sense of community. We all accept that proper community support is hugely beneficial to those with mental health issues generally. Through my membership of the APPG, and my work as an MP more widely, I have become much better informed about what community looks like for those with eating disorders. The support of a community, whether it be family, friends, school or a support organisation, is a wonderful thing for anyone struggling with their mental health. It is so often the first support network that someone will reach out to, and families and friends are there to catch their loved ones in the most difficult times.

Community care is often the best approach to eating disorder care. Beat’s “There’s No Place Like Home” report highlights the importance of expanding access to intensive community and day treatment for eating disorders. In many cases, it could be a lifeline for those struggling, allowing them to access a support network nearby, rather than being sent to treatment facilities sometimes hundreds of miles from their homes. However, effective community care can seem a long way off when the existing services for eating disorder treatments are so stretched right across the UK.

I want to talk a little bit about Scotland, given that my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South West (Dr Ahmed) is the Minister. The crisis in young people’s mental healthcare in Scotland is acute. CAMHS in Scotland are overwhelmed, and constituents contact me every week about their difficulties accessing services. My staff have to tell me to be careful not to raise people’s expectations, because the service is so overwhelmed. I have met staff who work in CAMHS and they are working so hard. I pay absolute tribute to them. They just need more resources.

I spoke to the chief executive of NHS Lothian specifically about the support for people with eating disorders, and she was very frank. She had just come into post and said that she thought the service was at the absolute minimum acceptable level. Perhaps I should not have welcomed that, but I did, because the starting point for fixing a broken system is to accept that it is not working. I welcome the fact that she did not try to gloss over it.

[Wera Hobhouse]

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that another big consideration is the mental health toll on people who work in eating disorder services and know that they cannot provide an adequate service to the many people who suffer? What are we doing for the people who work in these services and who want to do the best they can but simply cannot because of a lack of resources?

[Dr Arthur]

The workforce plan is key to resolving that, although I do not know an area in the NHS that has too many staff and wants to redistribute them. It is a huge challenge and we have to address it. Again, the starting point is to acknowledge that there is an issue and offer staff support where we where we can.

I raised this issue with NHS Lothian’s chief executive because—this was partly me exploiting my position— I had a close family member who had been dealing with an eating disorder. She was given an appointment to meet the service, and I was so frustrated, because it was months and months into the future. I waited patiently— I am a patient person—and my hope built up and up as we got closer to that day, but when we reached it, and my loved one went to the appointment, it was merely an assessment of whether a person needed proper support. I felt completely deflated. Hopefully, people are not still going through that.

In these times of crisis, it is all too often communities and families who are left to step up to provide what care they can. I have met parents in my constituency who are doing their absolute best for their children. I met one woman—another anecdote, I am afraid, Ms Vaz—who told me that her daughter was so weak that she had to phone an ambulance to take her to hospital. When her daughter arrived at the hospital, the medics said she was too weak to be removed from the ambulance and had to treat her there. The nature of the condition can often be secretive and very hidden until it is—hopefully not—too late.

Parents doing their absolute best is not enough, and professional medical help is required. Both the UK Government and the Scottish Government must go further to ensure that treatment is more readily accessible for those who can no longer rely solely on the support of their loved ones—I will come back to that. However, when considering the idea of community around eating disorders, we must also consider the online world and its ability to create a space for more dangerous communities.

Pro-eating disorder content, as referred to by the hon. Member for Bath, exists across the internet, from independent forums to social media sites that we all use daily. Those groups or posts provide “thinspiration” and tips on how someone can starve themselves or make themselves throw up. They glamorise the awful illness that eating disorders are, introducing them to previously well children and young people who might not have considered them, exaggerating conditions and sometimes normalising them.

This became particularly concerning during the pandemic, where we also saw a massive growth in eating disorders among the male population, as many young people were left isolated from their peers, turning to online communities. Instead of support, all too often they found content that damaged their mental health and isolated them further from the people around them. It is hard to understand just how disturbingly common such content is. Figures from April 2025 show that more than a quarter of young people have been exposed to eating disorder content online, which is likely an underestimation. That sits alongside the one third of children who have seen self-harm and suicide content online.

Social media sites are feeding young people this content from a never-ending algorithm, which we also heard about from the hon. Member for Bath. More children are likely to consume the content because of social media and its algorithms. The more they continue to see such content, the more they consume it, and the more they consume it, the more they continue to see it, creating a greater relationship with those harmful online communities.

The proliferation of this content is the result of passivity from tech firms, and in part, their profit motives. One study shows that Meta derives an annual $2 million in profit from pro-eating disorder content on Instagram. With content creating such profits, it is hard to see why social media sites would have ever self-regulated to ensure that content was hidden from children.

I met Meta this week, not to talk explicitly about eating disorders but to talk about the proposed ban on social media for under-16s. I can see that it is something the company feels challenged by, because it is concerned about a loss of income—not from people under 16, but from losing them as users as they move into adulthood. I hope, perhaps blindly, that there is an opportunity to work with those companies to ensure that the ban works properly. I support a ban on under-16s’ access to social media, and I know that my constituents do as well. We must also work with charities in this sector to make sure that the ban works.

I welcome the Online Safety Act and its commitment to ensuring that children see less harmful online content. Many constituents have contacted me since the summer raising concerns about the Act and what it means for their use of the internet as adults—often men, as hon. Members may not be surprised to hear. I understand the wider flaws, which I think were raised by the hon. Member for Bath when she spoke about their impact. While it is not perfect for eating disorders and suicidal ideation content for children and young people, it adds quite a lot of friction and makes it harder for young people to access that content. The Act is not perfect, but it is definitely a step in the right direction, and is a key part of protecting young people and reducing their exposure to harmful content, including eating disorder content and other negative influences.

I have only one more anecdote, you will be glad to hear, Ms Vaz. When I googled content about eating disorders and the Government policy on the train this morning, I was pleased to see Google was good at putting a warning in place, telling me that I might want to phone a particular helpline or contact a particular service to talk about eating disorders if that was why I was googling them. I was impressed by that and it is a good example of how tech companies, while they are quite often the bad guys, can do good stuff in this space as well. We must continue to ensure that communities supporting those with eating disorders are supported by proper medical care where necessary, and do all we can to remove harmful content.

I am sure this is not the first time that the Minister has attended a debate in Westminster Hall, or even in the main Chamber, in which the Government have been asked for a strategy, more staff and greater clarity about what they do. I know that he cares about this subject and that the Government are doing work in this area, but the calls for a strategy make sense because it would help to pin that work together and give us clarity about the next steps. I look forward to hearing the Minister sum up.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Johnson]

I am sorry.

The last Government’s work to channel more resources into mental health could not have been more welcome. This year, 2025-26, will be the first since 2016-17 that mental health spending has not risen as a proportion of health spending. That contravention of the mental health investment standard has raised alarm bells at the Health and Social Care Committee. Can the Minister enlighten us as to why the Government have decided to break the mental health investment standard after nearly a decade of progress? Does he think the percentage is now about right? Does it concern him that some ICBs have cut funding for mental health services? How does he expect that to impact on patients suffering from eating disorders?

I am particularly concerned about the impact on children and young people, and I declare an interest as a consultant NHS paediatrician. Some 6.4% of adults have a diagnosed eating disorder, but 12.5% of 17 to 19-year-olds have been diagnosed with an eating disorder since 2023. That amounts to one in five girls in that age group—four times the prevalence in boys. What specific action is the Minister taking to improve early intervention?

The previous Government got the ball rolling on establishing mental health support teams in schools, and had reached 35% coverage by the time of the general election, with a commitment to increase that to 100% of schools and colleges in England by 2030. Does the Minister plan to build on that work? What further action is he taking to improve links between eating disorder services, schools and families to ensure a joined-up approach to accessing specialist help and early diagnosis, which, as we have heard, is critical?

The hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) spoke of the challenges of transition. As a paediatrician, I see the challenges of transitioning many paediatric and adolescent conditions between children’s and adult services, but can the Minister say what he is doing specifically for those transitioning with eating disorders?

In my role as chair of the APPG on emerging drugs and online behavioural trends, I know the effect of social media on children’s and young people’s behaviours. Researchers from University College London, who examined evidence from 50 studies in 17 countries, found that social media usage is linked to eating disorders in young people, as it viciously promotes the idea that it is essential to be thin and fit, triggering a potentially extreme preoccupation with body image, weight and shape. Those obsessions are compounded by AI content, which can depict simply unachievable so-called perfection. As the hon. Member for Bath said, there are harmful videos online, with algorithms driving that harm, and those who look at these things seeing them more and more.

I recently held a policy debating competition among year 10 and year 12 students in my constituency, where students chose the topic of debate. Many of them spoke in favour of a social media ban for children as young as 16. It is a difficult issue, and that is not a perfect solution, but having just got a new mobile phone myself, I wonder why, when someone buys a phone, it cannot be set at a fixed age that can be changed only by the adult who pays the bill. A change in the law to restrict social media for under-16s would help to reduce that problem. I am interested in the Minister’s thoughts on that.

NHS guidance on eating disorders for ICBs has been raised in the debate. The NHS has refreshed that guidance, which is welcome, but patients will feel the difference only if it is actually implemented. The Minister has confirmed that there will not be a dedicated strategy for eating disorders, and there is no mention at all of eating disorders in the 70,000-word 10-year plan. Is the Minister confident that the refreshed guidance for ICBs will be sufficient on its own to improve care for people with eating disorders and to get waiting lists down? Does he have a strategy for how it will be enforced?

We have talked about the effects on families and carers. What action is the Minister taking to engage families, carers and supportive charities in plans for care? What support is available for parents, carers and siblings?

Workforce is key to delivering this strategy. We know that waiting times for eating disorder treatment are getting worse; analysis from Beat found that, in some cases, people with eating disorders face a three-and-a-half-year delay between falling ill and starting treatment. For someone with an eating disorder, that is three and a half years deeper into the illness. As we have heard, that makes it all the more difficult to treat the patient effectively and quickly pull them out of that difficult, dark place. What steps is the Minister taking to increase workforce capacity to help treat these patients and restore some stability and normality to their lives? I feel as though I ask this question every time, but the NHS long-term workforce plan is still not with us, having been delayed from last year, so when will it be published, and what tangible action will it take to boost the NHS eating disorders service?

It is not just about hiring more staff; it is also about where we are hiring them. That is important work, but more needs to be done to build on the progress. The Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership produced a highly detailed report about in-patient eating disorder service provision in the UK. As expected, there were blackspots for those vital services in many rural and coastal areas, such as in Lincolnshire. For adults and families in constituencies such as mine, where the closest service may be an hour’s car journey away, accessing eating disorder services is remarkably difficult. The Government have been insistent that rural and coastal areas will not be left behind on healthcare, but the blackspots tell us otherwise.

[Dr Arthur]

I thank the hon. Member for giving way—I have to say that she is one of my favourite Tories. Does she agree that there is a real inequality here? A one-hour car drive is a challenge, but if someone does not have a car, it is even more difficult. If they have a child, they might have to take a day off work to take them somewhere. So getting services, or capacity in the community, closer to people should absolutely be the ambition, shouldn’t it?

[Dr Johnson]

I completely agree. This is not just about people who have a car; for people who do not have a car and who are reliant on public transport, it can be even more difficult. People also struggle to take time off work because of the financial cost. For those who do have a car, there is also the cost of the petrol or diesel to get to the appointment. I would appreciate it if the Minister could update us on what he is doing to ensure that the neighbourhood and community slant of the three pillars of his health improvement plan are working in that regard.

As the hon. Member for Bath said, in-patient services are limited in capacity. In my paediatric practice, I have seen patients waiting on acute general paediatric wards—sometimes for several weeks—but those are really not the right place for them to be cared for. Could the Minister update us on what he is doing about increasing capacity in regional services?

I would like to speak a little about two other types of eating disorder: avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder and Prader-Willi syndrome. ARFID involves limiting the amount or variety of food consumed. It is not just picky eating. I have seen a teenager who lives on just plain pasta, nuggets and chips, and a younger boy who lives on a single flavour of one brand of milkshake and no solid food at all. That can be driven by fear and sensory and other issues. What is the Minister doing to make sure that services are available for these young children? NHS England’s refreshed eating disorder guidance recommends:

“ICBs should develop and deliver ARFID care pathways”.

What steps is the Minister taking to improve early diagnosis of ARFID, and what work will be done to train primary carers to identify it in children and adults, particularly in cases of neurodivergence?

Prader-Willi syndrome is a rare genetic disorder causing excessive appetite and overeating, which can lead to dangerous weight gain and restricted growth. Around 2,000 people live with Prader-Willi syndrome in the UK, and there is no cure. It is not mentioned in the NHS guidance, so what work is the Minister doing to ensure that people suffering from PWS have access to the care they need? What steps are we taking to expand genetic testing at birth to identify PWS and improve early access to treatment for these patients?

To sum up, mental health challenges are on the rise, and eating disorders are no exception. I urge the Minister to implement a clear approach to tackling eating disorders for adults, children and young people.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Ahmed]

The hon. Lady makes a really valid point. She will know, as I do, that the regulation of these platforms in relation to children’s access is a live issue at the heart of Government at the moment. She is right: the current provisions are not strong enough to be adequate safeguards. We do need more proactive intervention from our technology partners. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology takes that very seriously and is pushing very hard on it in relation to not only harm in this space, but harm in general, for children online.

Ofcom ensures that services uphold these duties, including for smaller online sites. Its small but risky services taskforce has assessed 20 services relating to this harm, over half of which have been at high risk for eating disorder content. I am happy to write to my colleagues in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, on the back of this debate, to learn from them what further action specific to eating disorders is coming down the pipeline, and I can relay that information to hon. Members assembled in this Chamber today.

I also share the deep concern about reports of people with eating disorders being offered end-of-life care.

[Dr Arthur]

Before we move on to end-of-life care, I welcome the great offer that the Minister has given to reach out to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology to better understand what they are doing on digital platforms. I expect that many of the people who are going to respond to the consultation around the banning of social media for under-16s will come from the healthcare profession, because of the connections between mental health and eating disorders and the use of these platforms. Will he be proactively asking for action to make sure that young people are protected? That would also mean more resources for people who have eating disorders, because hopefully fewer people would be coming forward.

[Dr Ahmed]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Being proactive and following the evidence should be our north star when we are formulating policy; I know that is true of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists has been explicit about eating disorders and end-of-life care. Anorexia nervosa is not a terminal illness in its own right. The college’s guidance on medical emergencies in eating disorders was developed precisely to ensure that preventable deaths become a thing of the past. NHS England is clear that no patient with an eating disorder should routinely be placed in palliative care. Our focus must always be on treatment and recovery, and underpinned by the hope of recovery.

We also share concerns about the accurate recordings of deaths where eating disorders may have been a contributing factor. The hon. Member for Bath outlined some of her frustrations regarding correspondence with the Ministry of Justice and I would be happy to take up that call on her behalf to make sure that she gets the correspondence that she is entitled to. The statutory medical examiner and coroner system provides a clear framework to ensure that deaths are properly investigated and recorded so that lessons are identified and patient safety is strengthened.

Although it is for the coroner to exercise independent judicial discretion to determine what is recorded as the medical cause of death, I can reassure hon. Members that the coroner’s office has been undergoing training to ensure that the recording of deaths associated with eating disorders is done more accurately and proactively. Accurate recording matters, and we will continue to work with our partners, including colleagues in the Ministry of Justice and clinicians, to ensure that not only are the statistics captured, but the learning underpinning those statistics is reflected in genuine improvements to care.

Eating disorders are serious and complex mental illnesses that can affect anyone at any age and in any community or family. They require timely treatment, skilled professionals and sustained support thereafter.

Brain Tumour Survival Rates

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Monday 9th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

What an honour it is to follow my fellow Scot, the hon. Member for Mid Dunbartonshire (Susan Murray), on this topic. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) for the way she introduced this debate. I think she said she was guided by experience, but I know she is also guided by the love she has for her sister. I thank her for securing the debate. She highlighted a real inequality at the heart of this matter—if she does not mind me saying so—as her sister was able to access the best treatment in Germany. Some people are able to pay a bit more or to run a Crowdfunder when they are faced with a brain tumour or another type of rare cancer; really, though, we should all have access to the same excellent treatment here in the UK.

I will speak a little about my private Member’s Bill and a little about the treatment for people with brain tumours in Scotland. Every year, more than a thousand people in Scotland will be diagnosed with a brain tumour. That may not sound like a large number, but, as we have heard already, while survival rates for many other cancers have improved, the needle for brain tumours has barely moved at all. Only 15% of adults in Scotland diagnosed with a high-grade brain tumour will survive beyond five years.

I know the weight of those numbers personally. My father-in-law was fit, active and full of life at the time of his diagnosis. It turned out that he had glioblastoma—the most aggressive form of brain tumour. He went from being a healthy man who enjoyed spending time with his grandchildren to having less than six months to live. As we have heard, that sudden, brutal trajectory is a story shared by far too many families. I always say that my father-in-law was a very dignified man, but the condition did not respect that at all in the impact it had on him and my wife’s family.

My father-in-law inspired my private Member’s Bill, the Rare Cancers Bill, which we have heard about today. It starts Committee stage in the Lords on Wednesday—let us hope there are no amendments. I thank everyone who has helped me to get the Bill this far, particularly my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden and her colleague Baroness Elliott, who is supporting us in the Lords very ably. I thank the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care for his support—my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden arranged a meeting for us very early on. I also thank the Under-Secretaries of State for Health and Social Care, my hon. Friends the Members for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton) and for Glasgow South West (Dr Ahmed), who is in the Chamber today and who has been a fantastic advocate from day one. Even the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Dr Johnson), has been a fantastic supporter.

I have to add my thanks to the hon. Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones)—I was going to call him Mr Cancer, but that does not sound like a great title. He is passionate about this and is widely respected across the sector. Of course, I also thank the hon. Member for Witney (Charlie Maynard). I have met his sister many times; she is—if I could put it this way—a very forthright person. When I first met her, at a reception for a cancer charity, she said that she was driven not through self-interest, but because as a mother, she wanted to spend longer with her children and to see them grown up. Who can argue with that?

Lastly, I thank the many charities—more than 40—that have been supporting us. Of particular relevance to this debate is Brain Tumour Research and the Brain Tumour Charity. I also thank H/Advisors for the work it is doing in helping us to keep the campaign pointing in the right direction, which is not always easy, I have to say.

Over the past year, I have been moved by the courage of so many people I have met, including Georgie. Through meeting both patients and families and through broader engagement with charities, clinicians and survivors, I have learned that there is no single easy solution to the problem that we face.

I have been guilty of saying that nothing has been happening in the sector, but the reality is that a lot is happening—it just needs a push in the right direction, or, as some would say, a kick up the backside. I do not know if that is acceptable language, Madam Deputy Speaker. There are promising breakthroughs in development, particularly in genome testing and targeted therapies, and crucially there is now national momentum behind this. The newly announced national cancer plan allocates £13.7 million to the NIHR brain tumour research consortium; through this and other significant partnerships, we will accelerate the volume of high-quality, innovative brain tumour research taking place right across the UK. This is a promise that we all—including the Minister—have a duty to ensure is delivered. I hope that we debate this subject regularly and that we can be impressed at the progress our Government are making.

Importantly, the plan recognises a long-standing problem in cancer research: too much early-stage discovery science never makes it through to translational research that delivers real diagnostics and treatments for patients. The commitment to link discovery scientists with translational researchers, to connect research infrastructure and to co-fund the Cancer Research UK brain tumour centres of excellence is exactly the kind of approach that this field has needed for many years.

For Scotland to truly benefit from this progress, we must ensure that our systems are ready to plug in to this UK-wide effort. One of my constituents, Dr Faye Robertson, is a consultant clinical oncologist and honorary clinical senior lecturer at the University of Edinburgh. She is at the forefront of this fight as part of a team on a mission to deliver breakthrough treatments and pursue cures for thousands of patients and families facing devastating diagnoses each year.

Faye’s team’s spin-out company Trogenix has secured £70 million of new finance to expand, upscale and develop. That sounds like a lot of money, but I understand that £70 million is just a drop in the ocean if real progress is to be made. They are doing fantastic work. Pre-clinical studies have shown that the biotech company’s breakthrough Odysseus platform could kill cancerous brain cells and stimulate the immune system against the tumours, while leaving the surrounding healthy cells and tissues untouched. This massive investment will accelerate Trogenix’s lead programme in glioblastoma multiforme, including a move to clinical trials.

By chance, I was at a mosque just outside my constituency on Saturday evening welcoming children from Gaza into the UK and meeting some of the health workers who have been supporting them. Among them was a neurologist who knew about the Trogenix work, which, he said, has made breathtaking progress although there is still a long way to go. It is work like that which gives me hope.

I met Faye in my office. She is hugely impressive, a fantastic communicator and a real intellect—if she is listening I have probably embarrassed her. I trust her when she says:

“Whole-genome sequencing is changing the outlook for treatment of many cancers, unlocking the promises of precision treatment. Yet in Scotland, out patients are still waiting.”

This is not a political point; it is just a matter of fact.

I also spoke to Dr Sarah Kingdon, who is the Tessa Jowell neuro-oncology clinical fellow at the Beatson cancer centre in Glasgow and also at the Edinburgh cancer centre—these people always seem to have long titles—and she absolutely agreed that there is a real gap when it comes to Scotland being able to access treatment because of the lack of testing. The neurologist I met on Saturday said that he was sending samples way down to the south of England and would have to wait for those samples to return. It is completely unacceptable that we do not have ready access to this technology in Scotland.

While other parts of the UK are moving toward routine whole-genome sequencing, Scottish patients face what has been described as a “genomic gap”. We have the scientific expertise—that is beyond doubt—and we have world-class infrastructure in Edinburgh. What we lack is a consistent policy commitment to make genomic testing a standard part of care. Without genomic testing, clinicians are fighting in the dark.

We owe it to the families who have watched loved ones fade in a matter of months to ensure that Scotland is not just a place where research happens but one where research reaches the patient. The national cancer plan shows that momentum is building right across the UK, and I hope breakthroughs in brain tumour research will be with us soon. Let us ensure that Scotland is ready to be part of that future.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden again for opening this debate and for the leadership she is showing. Very briefly, I want to highlight three fantastic campaigns, and then I have one ask of the Minister. The first campaign is Brain Cancer Justice, which Georgie is a part of. It advocates increased funding, research and support for brain cancer patients and families who are impacted by this deadly disease. I am sure that all Members here give those involved in the campaign our full support—otherwise I think they might be in the wrong debating Chamber.

The second campaign is for Owain’s law, which aims to standardise the process for storing and using brain tumour tissues, as we heard from the hon. Member for Witney. Ellie, who runs the campaign, is a fantastic communicator—it is impossible to disagree with her, because she is so passionate. She held a reception last week with someone called Samantha—I cannot quite remember where in the north of England she was from. Like Ellie, she has lost her husband to a brain tumour. She is devastated because she still loves her husband and is bringing up their children. She was explaining her predicament to us, all the while clutching pictures of her husband. It is awful that women are coming into this place so desperate but still hanging on to the love that they have for their loved ones. We have to listen to these people and demand action.

The last campaign I want to mention is for Hugh’s law. This is a campaign for paid leave and financial support for parents of critically ill children. Brain tumours are one of the biggest cancer types for children, so it really applies to this debate. I pay tribute to Brentford football club, which has already accepted the actions of this campaign. It has not waited for the Government to encourage companies or make it mandatory; it has just got on and done it because it is the right thing to do. I hope that others follow.

I have one ask of the Minister. I met Cancer Research UK on Monday last week—a fantastic charity, despite the challenges it faces, which we heard about earlier. One of those challenges, its representatives explained to me, is that each year it spends £870,000 on visa costs to bring the best researchers into the UK to help in the fight against this awful condition and others. If life sciences are a key part of our economy, and if we want to tackle these cancers, perhaps colleagues elsewhere in Government might be encouraged to waive the visa costs for these fantastic researchers, and hopefully more will then follow them.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Ahmed]

I am hearing my hon. Friend’s call to action loud and clear. I can report to her that—this is in addition to the other ongoing clinical trials in the area of brain tumour and glioma research—in October 2025, RECURRENT-GB opened for recruitment. This is a new UK multi-centre randomised controlled trial, supported by nearly £2 million of NIHR funding, which will explore, for instance, whether surgery can improve the quality of life for patients with glioblastoma when the glioblastoma comes back after treatment. I know that my hon. Friend will hold our feet to the fire when it comes to recruitment and the money being used appropriately, and I am delighted to continue working with her in that regard.

Since this Government took office, over 213,000 more people are getting a cancer diagnosis on time, over 36,000 more people are starting treatment on time, and rates of early diagnosis are hitting record highs. Despite these vital signs of recovery, we know that our NHS is still failing far too many cancer patients and their families, as Members from across the House have highlighted this evening. We know that brain tumours remain one of the hardest cancers to treat, and it remains a challenging and underserved area of research.

Last week, the Government published our national cancer plan. We now have a blueprint to shift the dial on rare and challenging cancers, underpinned by three key targets. First, we aim to save 330,000 more lives by 2035 by ensuring that three in every four people diagnosed in 2035 will be cancer-free or living well with cancer five years after diagnosis. Secondly, we will achieve the three cancer performance targets, which I mentioned earlier, by the end of March 2029. Finally, we will improve the quality of life for people living with cancer.

Rare and less common cancers are a priority for the Government, and this is the first ever cancer plan with a whole chapter dedicated to rare cancers. We aim to be in the top quartile of European countries for 14 rare cancers, including brain tumours, where we currently rank 22nd out of 24. We will pull every lever available to drive improvements for these cancer types. We know that one of the most effective ways to improve survival from cancer, including brain cancer, is to catch it and treat it early, so we have committed to reducing the number of rare cancers diagnosed in emergency settings, including brain tumours, which cannot be staged like other cancers and have therefore not been previously captured by early diagnosis measures.

[Dr Arthur]

This is about equality. There is a fantastic charity called The Eve Appeal, which is focused on gynaecological cancers. It makes the point that a disproportionate number of people with these cancers end up being diagnosed in A&E, by which time it is too late. Through a meeting I had with Blood Cancer UK, I know that ethnic minorities are much more likely to face a diagnosis in A&E than in a doctor’s surgery. This is something that we should do, not just because it is the right thing to do but because it is a matter of equality.

[Dr Ahmed]

I could not agree more with my hon. Friend, and that is why NIHR funding has been specifically allocated. One of the tests for a grant is the diversity of the population it will serve.

We recognise the challenges presented by brain tumours. By publishing regular performance data at a more granular level and adding diagnosis in emergency settings to our basket of early diagnosis metrics, we are committed to moving the dial on these issues. For all patients diagnosed with rare cancers, we will prioritise access to specialist treatment and multidisciplinary teams to ensure that they benefit from the best of evidence-based care. We will work with charities to support rare cancer patients, and to ensure that they have access to the right information to manage their cancer care. We wish to be held accountable on these commitments and to drive forward progress for rare cancer patients, and we will therefore appoint a national clinical lead for rare cancers, who will provide independent arbitration.

The actions I have listed make up just a small part of our plan. It will turn cancer, which is one of the country’s biggest killers, into a treatable chronic condition. We have developed our plans with patients, charities, families and clinicians, and have heard from many Members today. We are grateful for the continued campaigning on rare cancers and brain tumours.

National Cancer Plan

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Thursday 5th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Ashley Dalton]

We have extended NHS bowel cancer screening to cover people from the age of 50, and between now and 2028 we will be increasing the sensitivity of the faecal immunochemical test—otherwise known as the FIT test—and rolling it out nationally by 2028. Combined with increased uptake, that will deliver 17,000 earlier diagnoses by 2035 and save almost 6,000 lives.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

This plan gives so many people so much hope, and it was great to see it delivered with so much passion and energy. It is clear why the Minister is really respected by many people right across the sector. I have to say that I have never seen a statement delivered with so much energy—more of that, please. I also thank the Minister for her leadership and for supporting my Rare Cancers Bill from her very first day in office. She has found a place in the plan for my Bill, and I really do thank her for that.

I have three questions. Will rare cancers be recorded and reported separately as part of the plan? What influence will the cancer board have over the delivery of the plan? I think that point is quite important. Lastly, others have spoken about community organisations. In Gorgie in Edinburgh South West, we have the House of Hope, led by Lisa Fleming. She delivers a fantastic support service for women who have a breast cancer diagnosis. The next time the Minister is in Edinburgh, will she visit Lisa and her team?

[Ashley Dalton]

I commend my hon. Friend on all the work he has done, particularly on the Rare Cancers Bill, which the Government are delighted to support. Not only does this plan have the first ever chapter on rare and less-survivable cancers, but we will be appointing the first ever clinical lead for rare cancers, whose job it will be to make sure that rare cancers are properly counted, registered and that we continue to deliver in this area. I would be delighted to visit the House of Hope next time I am in Edinburgh.

Less Survivable Cancers

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Tuesday 6th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under you today, Mr Efford. I thank the hon. Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones) for securing this debate, a week ahead of Less Survivable Cancers Awareness Week.

The six less survivable cancers—those of the brain, liver, lungs, pancreas, oesophagus and stomach—take 67,000 lives every year. That is equivalent to two people every week in each UK constituency—a non-trivial number. The survival rate at five years is just 16%, so for many people who get a diagnosis of one of these cancers, it must feel like a death sentence.

Too often, people with these cancers are diagnosed late. Only 28% of less survivable cancers are diagnosed at stages 1 and 2, compared with 54% of cancers overall, and too many diagnoses are made in emergency departments, where treatment choices are limited. More broadly, we should never forget that someone who is female or from an ethnic minority is much more likely to be diagnosed with cancer in A&E, which is absolutely shameful.

We know what change would look like. If we could double early diagnosis across those six cancers, we could save an additional 7,500 lives every year. That should be our goal, and that is why I am proud that this Government are focused on prioritising early detection and faster diagnosis. I am pleased to see the Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton), here with us today. She is respected and trusted by the wider sector to deliver that agenda as part of the cancer plan, which hopefully we will see next month.

This change can be achieved through investing in research, as we heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh), as well as supporting the roll-out of innovative tests—such as liquid biopsies and the breath test for pancreatic cancer, which we saw at the UK Labour party conference—and expanding proactive case finding for those most at risk. Centres of excellence, better data and stronger national leadership are also critical.

I speak not just as a participant in today’s debate but as the sponsor of the Rare Cancers Bill, which hon. Members have mentioned; I thank them for their kind comments. The Bill is designed to help address exactly those gaps. I introduced it after my father-in-law Ivor died of glioblastoma, the cancer type that my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden has dedicated so much of her life to defeating. My Bill seeks to improve data collection, increase access to clinical trials and strengthen pathways for people with rare and less survivable cancers. The voices of those patients are often not heard. I really hope that in today’s debate, people will feel that they are heard. I look forward to the Minister’s response.

Puberty Suppressants Trial

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Wednesday 17th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Wes Streeting]

I wish I had certainty on this issue, and in some ways I envy my hon. Friend for his certainty. Having occasionally found myself to be a lonely voice in my party when sat on the Opposition Benches, I respect the fact that it is not easy to be a minority, dissenting voice, especially when one feels so strongly about an issue. I respect my hon. Friend’s position, even though I disagree with it—I do think this trial is the right thing to do. He is right that we need love, compassion and empathy for these young people; we also need to understand what health and care support will produce the best outcomes for them, which is what the trial is about.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for his leadership on this issue. Nobody envies him the decisions he has to make, but he has made the right decision on this.

During my election campaign, I met a fantastic mother—no mother could have loved their daughter more. She told me about how, when her daughter entered puberty, she had to come to terms with her biological sex, and about the impact on her mental health. To delay puberty, she stopped eating. She ended up arriving at hospital in an ambulance, so weak that she had to be treated in that ambulance. I welcome the fact that the trial will look at some of the side effects of puberty blockers, but will it also consider the impact of not taking puberty blockers in some cases? Will the Secretary of State also tell us how the House will be kept up to date on the trial as it progresses?

[Wes Streeting]

I can certainly promise my hon. Friend that we will keep the House regularly updated. The risks he has described have weighed heavily on my conscience when putting in place a permanent ban on puberty blockers; I have understood the risk involved, and the vulnerability of this particular group of children and young people. I also meant to say, in response to my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle and Clitheroe (Jonathan Hinder), that the parents of trans young people love their children very much. That has been at the heart of so many of the representations I have received, from parents as well as from young people.

Budget Resolutions

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Gethins]

We would have had the money that the hon. Lady talks about had we remained in the European Union and had access to European regional funding, which she does not want any more.

I am astonished at the split in the Labour party over what happens to the Chancellor. I am glad that the Chancellor has the hon. Lady’s confidence, but even the BBC is reporting that “we were misled”. We can all agree that the Chancellor holds a serious post. With the chair of the OBR gone, and the director general of the BBC having recently gone, we have to be sure that the Chancellor has the confidence of this House and those around her. Given the chaos of the past few days, we cannot be sure that that is the case anymore.

On a more positive note, I give the Health Secretary his due: the question of child poverty is close to his heart, as it is to mine, and he speaks passionately and eloquently about it. The Labour party was chucking out Members of Parliament for voting to get rid of the two-child cap, and it voted against our motion just a few weeks ago. A couple of years ago, the leader of the Scottish Labour party even said that getting rid of it would “spook the markets”. The markets have not been spooked. It has been done.

The Scottish Government were ahead of the game. What is the only part of the UK where child poverty is falling? Scotland. What is the only part of the UK that has a Scottish child payment that is driving down child poverty? Scotland. I know that the Health Secretary is constructive and takes this to heart.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

Will the hon. Member give way?

[Stephen Gethins]

I have already given way. I urge the Health Secretary to look at the benefits of the Scottish child payment. I am a believer in solidarity, and would love to see it being rolled out to the rest of the UK, given its successes in Scotland. I say that constructively, and I hope that the Health Secretary will consider it.

We are talking about renewal. On the energy sector, we have heard about Harbour Energy, which is the latest to announce job losses as a direct consequence of the energy profits levy. Offshore Energies UK has talked about the loss of thousands of jobs as a result of the levy. I remind the House that the UK is about the only state in the world that found oil and gas and never introduced a future generations fund. Why have such a fund? Because oil and gas are finite resources, and a fund allows us to invest in the future instead of taxing them out of existence, which is what is happening at the moment. I hear that from my constituents, and we hear it from across north-east Scotland.

Yesterday, the Prime Minister mentioned the failure of Brexit, and the Health Secretary has done the same. According to House of Commons figures, it is costing the public purse £250 million every day. That is a disgrace. It is a Tory and Reform failure that all of us are paying for. Trade is down. Brexit is responsible for a large chunk of the tax rises and, according to the Mayor of London’s research, made the economy £140 billion smaller. I appeal to the Labour party: start doing something differently from the Conservatives and Reform. They failed; please do not.

International Men’s Day

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Thursday 20th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

This debate is a chance to speak honestly about the pressures, expectations and challenges that too many men carry alone and in silence. My hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase (Josh Newbury) exemplified all that in his speech, and I thank him for it.

Across my constituency, there are organisations large and small supporting men and dads. One of them is Dads Rock, which has become a vital source of support for fathers at every stage of parenting. When I was elected last year, one of the first people to contact me was from Dads Rock, making it clear to me that I had to support the Dad Shift campaign.

I do not just have a dad joke, but a Scottish dad joke. There are 10 cows in a field, but which one is on holiday? Anyone? It is the one with a wee calf. [Laughter.] Thank you, thank you, but back to the Dad Shift. Its WhatsApp peer support group now brings together more than 700 dads from across the country. In its most recent survey, the top request from those fathers was for stronger mental health support, particularly for new dads.

We see the power of Dads Rock in stories like that of Euan, a young dad in his 20s in Edinburgh South West. He came to Dads Rock struggling with anxiety, isolation and difficulties maintaining contact with his eight-month-old child, after a separation from her mother. He was not included on the birth certificate, meaning that he had no parental rights, and as a result he felt overwhelmed and unsure about where to turn. With one-to-one support from Greg, one of the Dads Rock workers, Euan received guidance through a confusing and emotional court process. Greg helped him to rebuild communication with his child’s mother, and eventually she agreed to add him to the birth certificate, granting him parental rights and more stable access to his daughter. Euan then joined the dads and dice group, where he built friendships and confidence. In his own words:

“Attending Dads Rock’s dads night has me bonding with other dads and having a laugh.”

That is very important in life, with or without dad jokes. That is what meaningful, compassionate support for men looks like. It changes lives and strengthens families.

Dads Rock is not the only organisation doing this vital work. I pay tribute to Dr Ian Hounsome, whom I met in my office recently. Ian recently received a well-deserved award from Napier University for his extraordinary work supporting Andy’s Man Club. Ian first walked into Andy’s Man Club in 2021 fleeing an abusive relationship and looking for a sense of community. He soon became a volunteer and he now runs the club for the Edinburgh, Lothians and Borders area, supporting men at their lowest point. The recognition that he has received is well deserved, and the impact he is having on men across the region cannot be overstated. One of the big things in my life is parkrun. One of the people who organises parkrun in Edinburgh has really benefited from Andy’s Man Club, which is a great example of the work that Ian is doing and the impact it is having.

When we support men, their mental health, their relationships and their role as fathers, we strengthen our society. Organisations like Dads Rock and Andy’s Man Club show us what is possible when community, compassion and practical support come together. On the day after International Men’s Day, let us recognise these challenges, celebrate the men in our lives and the organisations driving change, and commit to ensuring that no man feels that he has to struggle alone.

World Stroke Day

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Tuesday 28th October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Uma Kumaran]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. Thrombectomy is highly effective and can transform recovery, massively reducing the chances of a disability. I hope that the Minister will respond to that point about care in my hon. Friend’s community.

Recent statistics show that while in London more than 10% of patients receive a thrombectomy, in the east of England, only 1% of stroke patients underwent this potentially lifesaving treatment. I apologise that I do not have the statistics for Scotland.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

[Uma Kumaran]

Does my hon. Friend have the statistics?

[Dr Arthur]

I do. I thank my hon. Friend for giving way, and wish her husband well—I am sure that he is incredibly proud of her. In Scotland in 2024, only 212 thrombectomies took place, which accounts for 2.2% of all eligible cases. Those are statistics that should shame us. If we compare it with Ireland, a comparably sized country, the number is five times higher. Does my hon. Friend agree that we can always do better?

[Uma Kumaran]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend, and thank him for having the statistics and always being a voice for Scotland. As we discussed, these inequalities have real-world consequences. Gaps in care and inequality in access jeopardise lives—in the most extreme cases they cost lives. While previous Governments have left stroke care underfunded and under-prioritised, I am proud to see this Labour Government tackling it head on. They are getting on with delivering the changes that we need to see so that the NHS can prevent strokes, and act fast when they strike, making the most of digital innovation, and delivering the best quality care for everyone as they recover.

While I am pleased to say that, after heart surgery this summer, Jacob is fully recovered, his stroke has absolutely transformed our family’s life—it changed it forever. But every day, hundreds of families across the UK face the same reality. That is why I can say that this Government’s target to slash stroke mortality in a decade is not just a statistic; it is lives saved and lives changed. I use this opportunity to thank the Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South West (Dr Ahmed), for both his professional and personal support to Jacob and I during this time in our lives. We will never forget his kindness and fast thinking.

I join hon. Members from across the House in calling on this Government to do all they can to ensure that their 10-year health plan delivers for stroke patients, no matter their age, postcode or what region they live in. Every stroke survivor must get the care that they need to thrive.