Westminster Hall
Thursday 9th July 2026
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 2 months, 1 week ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
13:30
13:30
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Real pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. And and thank you for doing that for us today. And this is a subject matter that I've asked for some time. It's a subject that's close to my heart and not merely as a matter of policy. Uh, but it's also as a matter of conscience, of human dignity and of our shared responsibility for those who are the most vulnerable in our world. I thank honourable members for for attending.
It's always a pleasure to see the the minister in this place. And he's always very jovial and very friendly. And he does always try. I think in a way, Mr. Chairman, uh, to give us the answers that we, we, we hope to have, and also to other members who have attended as well. I want to start my contribution by referring to a constituent. Um, her name is Margaret. She is 83 years old. She lives in the Ards Peninsula where I live in my constituency of Strangford.
And she still keeps a photograph on her mantelpiece of the street where she grew up. It wasn't in the Irish Peninsula, it was in Belfast. Uh, and street that no longer exists because of it was destroyed. One of the casualties of of the troubles that we had in Northern Ireland. So Margaret speaks about the cold. She speaks about the fear, and she speaks about the long, painful shadow of conflict. And she does that from experience.
She does that because it's her story and it's an 83 year old. She can remember it very, very well. So across Northern Ireland, we have thousands upon thousands of older people who carry with them this lived memory of trauma. My family lives with the trauma of the death of my own cousin, Kenneth, and my aunt and uncle and family were never the same. That's across all of Northern Ireland, Mr. chairman. There's many, many thousands and thousands of families are affected by the troubles.
And it's the impact as a as a title of the debate is the impact of conflicts on older people. And I'll be referring to a number of conflicts across the world, but the one from Northern Ireland, obviously, is the one that we can we can draw experience from. And hopefully illustrate that in the words today, that experience alongside my role of addressing health policy for the Democratic Unionist Party, means I understand viscerally what conflict does to older people. Maybe because I'm I'm older now myself.
Mr. Sherman, uh, you're more conscious of, of, of, of those who are just ahead of you. Um, and, and. It makes me very, very aware of their vulnerability. And I think, well, of my mother, my mother's 94 shouldn't have been 95, uh, or next Tuesday. If God spares her. And, and again, older people and what they've lived through. So the wounds, it does not simply win the body, though it does that too profoundly and permanently.
It fractures community. It destroys the very networks of care and support upon which older people depend. It strips away the intrinsic dignity that every human being deserves, regardless of age, regardless of faith, regardless of nationality. And my own community of the veterans of the Ulster Defence Regiment, the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the Prison Service and their families fully understand the lasting impact of trauma. I should have thanked at the beginning of politician. I thank the backbench committee for, uh, making this debate available.
When we look at the global picture as well, and we will look at the global picture because it's incredibly worrying as well. The scale of the crisis is mammoth. The United Nations estimates that approximately 200 million people aged 60 and over are currently living in fragile or conflict affected settings, and just for a few moments, just let that number sink in. 200 million older people living in fear, living without adequate health care, living without adequate shelter, shelter, living too often, without any recognition that their needs are specific or urgent and are distinct from those of younger people in the same crisis zone.
And I wanted this debate because I felt I have felt for some time that we look at the wars and we do things as we see them coming, as we, we see the, um, young people and we see the deaths and we see the non-education, we see the, the medical health. But in the middle of that, you'll see old people, uh, elderly, those of a, of another generation, those of an older generation who are having incredible problems. We see. This with devastating clarity in Ukraine.
And whenever we read the stories of Ukraine, they always move me quite, quite significantly, Mr. Chairman, and members. And you see who's left in the villages that are destroyed, who's left amongst the ruins?Usually the older people living in the basements. Uh, and I want to just focus on them for a few moments, I can. So I've stood consistently or as has this House, as has the minister has has every member here with the Ukrainian people in their hour of need. Ukraine has the highest proportion of older people affected by conflict anywhere in the world, with 1 in 4 Ukrainians aged over 60 in eastern and southern Ukraine near the front line.
There's even more acute, with 1 in 3 people needing assistance being aged over 60 years of age when the families fled, of course, and to get away from the violence, they get away from the attacks to get away from the Russian aggression. 5.4% of those refugees arriving in Europe were over 65. Um, why?Because our elderly people are left behind, either choosing to remain in their homes because it's the only place they have with their pets, uh, their cats or their dogs. Um, but also because of severe health conditions.
And that makes fleeing conflict zones more difficult. Even though the Ukrainians always try to give them the choice of, of being able to leave. This has left older people facing acute challenges. Shockingly, around 50% of documented civilian deaths in Ukraine have been people older than 60 years of age. They have faced severe disruptions to their support systems as family members, as friends or carers have all left, and 90% of older people in Ukraine are unable to pay for even their basic medical needs to be met.
And the other thing about it is they're probably in the conflict zones and very often their medications or the medical help that they, they they need cannot get to them. And they may. And 43% of those, of course, have at least one disability. And we know from my position as health spokesperson for my party here that when you get to a certain age, you don't just have one thing wrong with you. You maybe have a half a dozen things. Complex needs are incredibly, um.
Common amongst. Many of elderly people. And that makes evacuations and displacement even more challenging. They face barriers of mobility, of digital exclusion and bureaucratic complexity that becomes insurmountable when you're 80 years old and have lost just about everything that he ever had, and including your family, including many others as well. I speak as someone who has spent considerable time examining the collapse of health systems under the pressure of conflict, and I want to underline the point about calm with some force.
Older people have health care needs that are complex, that are chronic, that are ongoing. They need orthopedic care. Um, many of the old people you see will be, um, struggling to, uh, get about at all. Uh, whenever you're in a war zone and you're under attack, it makes it even more difficult. They need cardiac monitoring as well. They need management of long term conditions like diabetes, which I'm a, I'm a recipient of that respiratory disease, hypertension, dementia. These aren't luxuries.
These are the basic requirements of survival. So when a conflict destroys a hospital or a medical center or a GP surgery, when it dismisses a medical team, when it cuts off a supply chain of medicines, it is the older people who suffer first and who suffer. Most. Long term conditions are worsened, of course, by food and income security. The pressures of displacement, living in conflict situations, no shops. Um, you live, uh, by the most. Small means of cooking.
It may only be a we, uh, we, we, um, gas thing or something. It may be even wood in a fire. That may be your, your methodology of cooking. The waiting list that I've seen grew to crisis point here in Northern Ireland, even in peace time are as nothing compared to what older people face when the infrastructure of health care is obliterated by war itself. So let's look at some of those places across the world, Mister chairman and fellow members, where the harrowing theatres of war are what they focus upon to have a calm place.
Lebanon older people face compounding risks from the escalation of hostilities, rising displacement, economic collapse and pressure on a weakened health system at 2025. Health age assessment of 670 older women and men across five regions found that they were frequently excluded from assistance and recovery planning because their. They're at an age. They're probably still in a danger zones, uh, and that there are no effort is made to help them. 61% received no humanitarian aid after the conflict, 39% reported being completely left out of the response even during active hostilities.
And only 12% of those who did receive aid said it met their needs. So many have been unwilling or unable to leave their homes despite evacuation orders, while those who fled found shelters poorly equipped for mobility, for care and for dignity. And all those three things are so important. Lebanon illustrates a wider failure. It may be present, yes, but if it is not designed around older people's access needs, including their outreach, including transport support, continuity of medication, assistive devices, home based care and mental health support, it will not reach those most at risk because who's at the back of the queue?Those of an elderly generation.
Sudan's my second place where I want to focus. And today, in business questions, the question was asked about Sudan. There's also questions about Sudan and the NATO question, uh, which the minister, uh, Secretary of State replied to earlier on. I led a debate in this hall. Uh, Mr. Chairman, I think it was four weeks today on Sudan. And we highlighted the issues of Sudan. And it is absolutely tragic what's happening there. Uh, since fighting erupted in April 2023, Sudan has seen repeated waves of displacement.
More than 20 million people need health assistance, and around 1 million of them are older people. Civilians face worsening conflict in the Kordofan region and risk escalated violence, confinement and starvation. And the UN figures which corroborate and give an evidential base to this show, older men and women each make up about 4% of the population living in displacement camps, with around 3% live in refugee camps in neighboring countries. So older people remain remain one of the least supported groups in Sudan. Human rights monitors report that they are often left out of the aid programs, especially in remote areas.
Um, I know there is a massive task to respond to, to, to, uh, the aid and, and to get to the remote areas. I understand that, but there has to be some consideration given for that. Some ideas at the end, uh, which I'm hopeful that the minister will give us some encouragement with. Due to limited mobility, many struggled to flee explosions or attacks. He just I mean, I'm 71. I can't run the Martin no more. I could probably walk it, but I couldn't run it.
Uh, and those who are on mobility aids, uh, can't walk or run at any speed whatsoever, so they can't get away from the impending, uh, destruction that's coming their way with the health, uh, younger people or older people also face high rates of depression and post-traumatic stress. Um, you, as you get older, Mr. Chairman, maybe you and I would recognize this, this particular trait we do tend to perhaps, maybe, uh, um, things worry us more. Perhaps maybe what they did when we were younger, you know?Uh, but but I say that in jest, but but the fact is that we do, we, we we do, we do sometimes, uh, dwell upon things, uh, longer than perhaps we should.
It's always a pleasure to see the the minister in this place. And he's always very jovial and very friendly. And he does always try. I think in a way, Mr. Chairman, uh, to give us the answers that we, we, we hope to have, and also to other members who have attended as well. I want to start my contribution by referring to a constituent. Um, her name is Margaret. She is 83 years old. She lives in the Ards Peninsula where I live in my constituency of Strangford.
And she still keeps a photograph on her mantelpiece of the street where she grew up. It wasn't in the Irish Peninsula, it was in Belfast. Uh, and street that no longer exists because of it was destroyed. One of the casualties of of the troubles that we had in Northern Ireland. So Margaret speaks about the cold. She speaks about the fear, and she speaks about the long, painful shadow of conflict. And she does that from experience.
She does that because it's her story and it's an 83 year old. She can remember it very, very well. So across Northern Ireland, we have thousands upon thousands of older people who carry with them this lived memory of trauma. My family lives with the trauma of the death of my own cousin, Kenneth, and my aunt and uncle and family were never the same. That's across all of Northern Ireland, Mr. chairman. There's many, many thousands and thousands of families are affected by the troubles.
And it's the impact as a as a title of the debate is the impact of conflicts on older people. And I'll be referring to a number of conflicts across the world, but the one from Northern Ireland, obviously, is the one that we can we can draw experience from. And hopefully illustrate that in the words today, that experience alongside my role of addressing health policy for the Democratic Unionist Party, means I understand viscerally what conflict does to older people. Maybe because I'm I'm older now myself.
Mr. Sherman, uh, you're more conscious of, of, of, of those who are just ahead of you. Um, and, and. It makes me very, very aware of their vulnerability. And I think, well, of my mother, my mother's 94 shouldn't have been 95, uh, or next Tuesday. If God spares her. And, and again, older people and what they've lived through. So the wounds, it does not simply win the body, though it does that too profoundly and permanently.
It fractures community. It destroys the very networks of care and support upon which older people depend. It strips away the intrinsic dignity that every human being deserves, regardless of age, regardless of faith, regardless of nationality. And my own community of the veterans of the Ulster Defence Regiment, the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the Prison Service and their families fully understand the lasting impact of trauma. I should have thanked at the beginning of politician. I thank the backbench committee for, uh, making this debate available.
When we look at the global picture as well, and we will look at the global picture because it's incredibly worrying as well. The scale of the crisis is mammoth. The United Nations estimates that approximately 200 million people aged 60 and over are currently living in fragile or conflict affected settings, and just for a few moments, just let that number sink in. 200 million older people living in fear, living without adequate health care, living without adequate shelter, shelter, living too often, without any recognition that their needs are specific or urgent and are distinct from those of younger people in the same crisis zone.
And I wanted this debate because I felt I have felt for some time that we look at the wars and we do things as we see them coming, as we, we see the, um, young people and we see the deaths and we see the non-education, we see the, the medical health. But in the middle of that, you'll see old people, uh, elderly, those of a, of another generation, those of an older generation who are having incredible problems. We see. This with devastating clarity in Ukraine.
And whenever we read the stories of Ukraine, they always move me quite, quite significantly, Mr. Chairman, and members. And you see who's left in the villages that are destroyed, who's left amongst the ruins?Usually the older people living in the basements. Uh, and I want to just focus on them for a few moments, I can. So I've stood consistently or as has this House, as has the minister has has every member here with the Ukrainian people in their hour of need. Ukraine has the highest proportion of older people affected by conflict anywhere in the world, with 1 in 4 Ukrainians aged over 60 in eastern and southern Ukraine near the front line.
There's even more acute, with 1 in 3 people needing assistance being aged over 60 years of age when the families fled, of course, and to get away from the violence, they get away from the attacks to get away from the Russian aggression. 5.4% of those refugees arriving in Europe were over 65. Um, why?Because our elderly people are left behind, either choosing to remain in their homes because it's the only place they have with their pets, uh, their cats or their dogs. Um, but also because of severe health conditions.
And that makes fleeing conflict zones more difficult. Even though the Ukrainians always try to give them the choice of, of being able to leave. This has left older people facing acute challenges. Shockingly, around 50% of documented civilian deaths in Ukraine have been people older than 60 years of age. They have faced severe disruptions to their support systems as family members, as friends or carers have all left, and 90% of older people in Ukraine are unable to pay for even their basic medical needs to be met.
And the other thing about it is they're probably in the conflict zones and very often their medications or the medical help that they, they they need cannot get to them. And they may. And 43% of those, of course, have at least one disability. And we know from my position as health spokesperson for my party here that when you get to a certain age, you don't just have one thing wrong with you. You maybe have a half a dozen things. Complex needs are incredibly, um.
Common amongst. Many of elderly people. And that makes evacuations and displacement even more challenging. They face barriers of mobility, of digital exclusion and bureaucratic complexity that becomes insurmountable when you're 80 years old and have lost just about everything that he ever had, and including your family, including many others as well. I speak as someone who has spent considerable time examining the collapse of health systems under the pressure of conflict, and I want to underline the point about calm with some force.
Older people have health care needs that are complex, that are chronic, that are ongoing. They need orthopedic care. Um, many of the old people you see will be, um, struggling to, uh, get about at all. Uh, whenever you're in a war zone and you're under attack, it makes it even more difficult. They need cardiac monitoring as well. They need management of long term conditions like diabetes, which I'm a, I'm a recipient of that respiratory disease, hypertension, dementia. These aren't luxuries.
These are the basic requirements of survival. So when a conflict destroys a hospital or a medical center or a GP surgery, when it dismisses a medical team, when it cuts off a supply chain of medicines, it is the older people who suffer first and who suffer. Most. Long term conditions are worsened, of course, by food and income security. The pressures of displacement, living in conflict situations, no shops. Um, you live, uh, by the most. Small means of cooking.
It may only be a we, uh, we, we, um, gas thing or something. It may be even wood in a fire. That may be your, your methodology of cooking. The waiting list that I've seen grew to crisis point here in Northern Ireland, even in peace time are as nothing compared to what older people face when the infrastructure of health care is obliterated by war itself. So let's look at some of those places across the world, Mister chairman and fellow members, where the harrowing theatres of war are what they focus upon to have a calm place.
Lebanon older people face compounding risks from the escalation of hostilities, rising displacement, economic collapse and pressure on a weakened health system at 2025. Health age assessment of 670 older women and men across five regions found that they were frequently excluded from assistance and recovery planning because their. They're at an age. They're probably still in a danger zones, uh, and that there are no effort is made to help them. 61% received no humanitarian aid after the conflict, 39% reported being completely left out of the response even during active hostilities.
And only 12% of those who did receive aid said it met their needs. So many have been unwilling or unable to leave their homes despite evacuation orders, while those who fled found shelters poorly equipped for mobility, for care and for dignity. And all those three things are so important. Lebanon illustrates a wider failure. It may be present, yes, but if it is not designed around older people's access needs, including their outreach, including transport support, continuity of medication, assistive devices, home based care and mental health support, it will not reach those most at risk because who's at the back of the queue?Those of an elderly generation.
Sudan's my second place where I want to focus. And today, in business questions, the question was asked about Sudan. There's also questions about Sudan and the NATO question, uh, which the minister, uh, Secretary of State replied to earlier on. I led a debate in this hall. Uh, Mr. Chairman, I think it was four weeks today on Sudan. And we highlighted the issues of Sudan. And it is absolutely tragic what's happening there. Uh, since fighting erupted in April 2023, Sudan has seen repeated waves of displacement.
More than 20 million people need health assistance, and around 1 million of them are older people. Civilians face worsening conflict in the Kordofan region and risk escalated violence, confinement and starvation. And the UN figures which corroborate and give an evidential base to this show, older men and women each make up about 4% of the population living in displacement camps, with around 3% live in refugee camps in neighboring countries. So older people remain remain one of the least supported groups in Sudan. Human rights monitors report that they are often left out of the aid programs, especially in remote areas.
Um, I know there is a massive task to respond to, to, to, uh, the aid and, and to get to the remote areas. I understand that, but there has to be some consideration given for that. Some ideas at the end, uh, which I'm hopeful that the minister will give us some encouragement with. Due to limited mobility, many struggled to flee explosions or attacks. He just I mean, I'm 71. I can't run the Martin no more. I could probably walk it, but I couldn't run it.
Uh, and those who are on mobility aids, uh, can't walk or run at any speed whatsoever, so they can't get away from the impending, uh, destruction that's coming their way with the health, uh, younger people or older people also face high rates of depression and post-traumatic stress. Um, you, as you get older, Mr. Chairman, maybe you and I would recognize this, this particular trait we do tend to perhaps, maybe, uh, um, things worry us more. Perhaps maybe what they did when we were younger, you know?Uh, but but I say that in jest, but but the fact is that we do, we, we we do, we do sometimes, uh, dwell upon things, uh, longer than perhaps we should.
13:43
13:43
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I speak for myself, but I think you're not too far off my years, Mr. Chairman, and I suspect I know I'm older than you, but there you are. Um, uh, the, uh, due to the, uh the health. Sector has been destroyed. Medicines in short supply, even those with manageable conditions are at grave risk, and parts of Darfur, dozens of older people are among those who have died of hunger in recent months after armed groups blocked the food deliveries themselves. And who.
Who can get to the aid centers or the food centers?Uh, because of their disabilities, because of their needs. The older people. Why is this allowed to happen?Because older people are invisible in the data, and we often come back to data when it comes to debates, debates, and health debates on anything, perhaps because older people, um, when it comes to data collection and analysis, fail to capture older people's realities, with data collection often stopping before the age of 60. So if you're over 60, uh, your time in this world, according to those who take data is limited.
Were they included, they are often lumped together as a single group, those over 60 years, which obscures diversity and hinders effective policy making. Evidence shows that age inclusion specialists can change humanitarian assistance by improving assessments. The data collection, the training, the program design and the data collection tools used by health Aids. Ethiopia, as one example, identified six times more older people in one region of Tigray than had been previously known. Because the data wasn't there because the information wasn't available and the numbers of older people were on known in Venezuela, Aids inclusion specialists supported humanitarian actors through adjusted food basket guidance to better meet nutritional needs.
So they they used the data for the betterment. And Venezuela. Unfortunately, at the moment, uh, has had some, uh, double earthquakes and many people are missing. Uh, and they have incredible problems. Uh, more a 2025 systematically found the barriers to Aids inclusive healthcare include inaccessible health services, shortage of medication and equipment, limited geriatric expertise, age discrimination, low mobility and dependence on others. And more often than not, for elderly people, there is a dependence on others. Funding reform is desperately needed.
Help ages 2025 analysis found older people are rarely named in humanitarian funding databases. So how can you, uh, um. Deliver the need, the aid, the medication, the food, the help, the support to the numbers of elderly people. If you don't know how many there are, well, six, five, six, 6.5% of descriptions mentioning older people in some and only in 0.1% of the project's titles. And must also raise the question. I always do it, Mr. Chairman. You expect me to.
On the question of freedom of religion or belief, because it's intrinsic to this debate in ways that are not always acknowledged and many conflict zones in Myanmar, in Nigeria and Syria and Ethiopia, older people are targeted not merely because they're in the wrong place at the wrong time, but because they are the custodians of their community's faith and culture. The honourable lady, um, who is is going to speak after me. Uh, she and I share the concern and I look forward to your contribution. Those elderly people, those who are the custodians of, of communities, faith and culture, they're the ones who hold the memory of worship, of tradition, of identity.
They're the heartbeat of the congregation. They're the lifeblood of the community. And because of that, they are targeted. They're driven from their homes because of their faith. They are denied the right to practice their faith that has sustained them across a lifetime of living. This is not simply a humanitarian failure, it's a moral outrage. And the question one of the questions does the minister agree that the protection of older people in conflict zones must explicitly include the protection of their right to freedom of religion or belief?I know the minister's answer to that, of course, but just for the record for Hansard, perhaps we can have that.
I don't want to be churlish either, uh, in relation to the progress that has been made in international humanitarian law. There are frameworks, there are conventions, there are, and there is the Sphere Handbook, there is the Inter-Agency Standing Committee's work on inclusions. But let me be direct. If we can, in a respectful way, the gap between the frameworks that exist on paper and the reality experienced by an 80 year old woman sheltering in a basement in Kharkiv, or a 75 year old pastor driven from his church in Kaduna State in Nigeria is vast and it is unconscionable.
Uh, so I have a number of questions to ask the minister. Please and think that they. Seven to be precise, um, make can I ask him all of these things in order make humanitarian aid aids inclusive by default?Will the Minister commit to requiring UK funded programs to explicitly and systematically identify and reach older people, including those living alone with disabilities, with chronic illnesses, or unable to travel to distribution points?When it comes to protecting older people's health care and well-being, will the Fcdo prioritize the continuity of medication accessible health services, assistive devices, safe evacuation, accessible shelters, home based care if possible, and mental health support in active conflicts.
Will the government support universal social pensions and inclusive cash assistance and shock responsive systems that enable older people to meet their own priorities?Uh, with dignity. That's when it comes to Aids, inclusive cash and social protection. And will the department also include older people in protection?And the responses, pre-existing patterns of discrimination are exacerbated during conflict and extreme levels of violence against women and girls is a recurring theme. Older women are particularly at risk during due to age, gender, disability, caring responsibilities, widowhood or financial dependence, and the UK International Strategic Framework on Women and Girls fails to consider how older women are affected.
And I think it must. There must be some focus for. For older women in particular, all government ensure its implementation includes explicit reference to older women's humanitarian protection, safeguarding and programs that tackle gender based violence through a life course approach. The Russian army and some of them, not them all, but a proportion of. Carried out some horrendous, uh, sexual. Attacks upon girls as young as eight and women as old as 80. Uh, and I've, I've spoken about this in the chamber in the past, and I think we need to protect women of all ages and all.
We count older people properly. Will the minister require age, sex and disability disaggregated data, including specific age cohorts beyond 60 that age of 60?What seems to stop when you're over 60?You're in a category of we don't know about you. For all humanitarian assistance that the UK government provides or supports, and we must recognise all the people as rightsholders as well. And will the UK support the creation of a UN convention on the Rights of Older persons to recognise older people's agency and contributions, and better facilitate their participation in humanitarian planning, uh, peace building, monitoring and local decision making.
And lastly, uh, Mr. Chairman, um, engaging with devolved administrations. And will the minister engage directly with the relevant ministers in the devolved administrations of Scotland and Wales, and also in Northern Ireland, where we we have hard won knowledge of what conflict does to older people across generations, so that the lived experience of communities like mine can inform and enrich our international humanitarian policy. So I opened the conversation with Margaret, so I close that. I began with Margaret. She told me once, and some of the words I can't forget the worst thing about conflict is not the noise of it.
The worst thing she said, as she said to me, is the silence that comes after when the world moves on and forgets that you're still carrying all that pain and all that memory and trauma. So the older people. Mr. chairman of Ukraine, of Sudan, of Lebanon, of the Sahel, and of every conflict zone across the world are still carrying it. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, this great nation, the four nations together as one, has both the capacity and the moral duty, I believe, to ensure that they're not forgotten.
So I commend this debate to the House. I thank members for turning up. I look forward to their contributions and look forward to the shadow. I very much look forward to the Minister's contribution and looking forward to his encouragement, but I look forward as well to ensure that the older people in conflict are not forgotten about. There's ways of doing it better. Let's start now. Thank you.
Who can get to the aid centers or the food centers?Uh, because of their disabilities, because of their needs. The older people. Why is this allowed to happen?Because older people are invisible in the data, and we often come back to data when it comes to debates, debates, and health debates on anything, perhaps because older people, um, when it comes to data collection and analysis, fail to capture older people's realities, with data collection often stopping before the age of 60. So if you're over 60, uh, your time in this world, according to those who take data is limited.
Were they included, they are often lumped together as a single group, those over 60 years, which obscures diversity and hinders effective policy making. Evidence shows that age inclusion specialists can change humanitarian assistance by improving assessments. The data collection, the training, the program design and the data collection tools used by health Aids. Ethiopia, as one example, identified six times more older people in one region of Tigray than had been previously known. Because the data wasn't there because the information wasn't available and the numbers of older people were on known in Venezuela, Aids inclusion specialists supported humanitarian actors through adjusted food basket guidance to better meet nutritional needs.
So they they used the data for the betterment. And Venezuela. Unfortunately, at the moment, uh, has had some, uh, double earthquakes and many people are missing. Uh, and they have incredible problems. Uh, more a 2025 systematically found the barriers to Aids inclusive healthcare include inaccessible health services, shortage of medication and equipment, limited geriatric expertise, age discrimination, low mobility and dependence on others. And more often than not, for elderly people, there is a dependence on others. Funding reform is desperately needed.
Help ages 2025 analysis found older people are rarely named in humanitarian funding databases. So how can you, uh, um. Deliver the need, the aid, the medication, the food, the help, the support to the numbers of elderly people. If you don't know how many there are, well, six, five, six, 6.5% of descriptions mentioning older people in some and only in 0.1% of the project's titles. And must also raise the question. I always do it, Mr. Chairman. You expect me to.
On the question of freedom of religion or belief, because it's intrinsic to this debate in ways that are not always acknowledged and many conflict zones in Myanmar, in Nigeria and Syria and Ethiopia, older people are targeted not merely because they're in the wrong place at the wrong time, but because they are the custodians of their community's faith and culture. The honourable lady, um, who is is going to speak after me. Uh, she and I share the concern and I look forward to your contribution. Those elderly people, those who are the custodians of, of communities, faith and culture, they're the ones who hold the memory of worship, of tradition, of identity.
They're the heartbeat of the congregation. They're the lifeblood of the community. And because of that, they are targeted. They're driven from their homes because of their faith. They are denied the right to practice their faith that has sustained them across a lifetime of living. This is not simply a humanitarian failure, it's a moral outrage. And the question one of the questions does the minister agree that the protection of older people in conflict zones must explicitly include the protection of their right to freedom of religion or belief?I know the minister's answer to that, of course, but just for the record for Hansard, perhaps we can have that.
I don't want to be churlish either, uh, in relation to the progress that has been made in international humanitarian law. There are frameworks, there are conventions, there are, and there is the Sphere Handbook, there is the Inter-Agency Standing Committee's work on inclusions. But let me be direct. If we can, in a respectful way, the gap between the frameworks that exist on paper and the reality experienced by an 80 year old woman sheltering in a basement in Kharkiv, or a 75 year old pastor driven from his church in Kaduna State in Nigeria is vast and it is unconscionable.
Uh, so I have a number of questions to ask the minister. Please and think that they. Seven to be precise, um, make can I ask him all of these things in order make humanitarian aid aids inclusive by default?Will the Minister commit to requiring UK funded programs to explicitly and systematically identify and reach older people, including those living alone with disabilities, with chronic illnesses, or unable to travel to distribution points?When it comes to protecting older people's health care and well-being, will the Fcdo prioritize the continuity of medication accessible health services, assistive devices, safe evacuation, accessible shelters, home based care if possible, and mental health support in active conflicts.
Will the government support universal social pensions and inclusive cash assistance and shock responsive systems that enable older people to meet their own priorities?Uh, with dignity. That's when it comes to Aids, inclusive cash and social protection. And will the department also include older people in protection?And the responses, pre-existing patterns of discrimination are exacerbated during conflict and extreme levels of violence against women and girls is a recurring theme. Older women are particularly at risk during due to age, gender, disability, caring responsibilities, widowhood or financial dependence, and the UK International Strategic Framework on Women and Girls fails to consider how older women are affected.
And I think it must. There must be some focus for. For older women in particular, all government ensure its implementation includes explicit reference to older women's humanitarian protection, safeguarding and programs that tackle gender based violence through a life course approach. The Russian army and some of them, not them all, but a proportion of. Carried out some horrendous, uh, sexual. Attacks upon girls as young as eight and women as old as 80. Uh, and I've, I've spoken about this in the chamber in the past, and I think we need to protect women of all ages and all.
We count older people properly. Will the minister require age, sex and disability disaggregated data, including specific age cohorts beyond 60 that age of 60?What seems to stop when you're over 60?You're in a category of we don't know about you. For all humanitarian assistance that the UK government provides or supports, and we must recognise all the people as rightsholders as well. And will the UK support the creation of a UN convention on the Rights of Older persons to recognise older people's agency and contributions, and better facilitate their participation in humanitarian planning, uh, peace building, monitoring and local decision making.
And lastly, uh, Mr. Chairman, um, engaging with devolved administrations. And will the minister engage directly with the relevant ministers in the devolved administrations of Scotland and Wales, and also in Northern Ireland, where we we have hard won knowledge of what conflict does to older people across generations, so that the lived experience of communities like mine can inform and enrich our international humanitarian policy. So I opened the conversation with Margaret, so I close that. I began with Margaret. She told me once, and some of the words I can't forget the worst thing about conflict is not the noise of it.
The worst thing she said, as she said to me, is the silence that comes after when the world moves on and forgets that you're still carrying all that pain and all that memory and trauma. So the older people. Mr. chairman of Ukraine, of Sudan, of Lebanon, of the Sahel, and of every conflict zone across the world are still carrying it. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, this great nation, the four nations together as one, has both the capacity and the moral duty, I believe, to ensure that they're not forgotten.
So I commend this debate to the House. I thank members for turning up. I look forward to their contributions and look forward to the shadow. I very much look forward to the Minister's contribution and looking forward to his encouragement, but I look forward as well to ensure that the older people in conflict are not forgotten about. There's ways of doing it better. Let's start now. Thank you.
13:52
13:52
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Mr. Betts, it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I do congratulate the honourable member for Strangford in securing this debate and also wish his mother a very happy birthday for next Tuesday. In many areas of deep conflict, the population rarely reach the definitions that we give to older people. In Gaza, life expectancy has plummeted from 73 years to just 40.5 years. Sudan 66 years. Nigeria 55. Likewise with Chad. Compare that to 81.3 years here in the UK and the privilege we have in being safe and secure as a nation, conflict free.
And of course, Japan 84.7 years. It shows that conflict shortens lives by decades through poor access to health care and pharmaceuticals, disability disruption and displacement, prevalence of disease and hastened frailty in an environment of climate change, floods and famine. Gender based violence scars the lives of its survivors and issue. I am so proud that our Foreign Secretary has rightly placed at the heart of her work. As we see the prevalence as this weapon used in war, access to health care, an issue I particularly look at here in the in the house is significantly reduced as the targeting of health facilities and health professionals has now been seen as central in many conflicts.
We've seen that happening in Gaza, and we've also seen that in Sudan, where health professionals run the risk not only in the work that they do, but are targeted by weapons to take them out. And of course, breaking the rules of just wars. But these walls, of course, are never just. But also, we have seen the shrinking capacity of healthcare against the increased demand, whether that is from the the wounds of war, but also the sharp rise we're seeing of sexual violence against women, the poor mental health which is sustained.
And as a result of that, the the access, the ability to access healthcare is reduced. And that, of course, will always impact older people. And often in war, we look at the wounds and of course we understand why, but it's the chronic conditions, the cancers, the diabetes, the other illnesses which often get forgotten, the drugs not getting through, the treatments not available, the clinicians simply diverted onto the acute phases. And of course, our hearts beat when we know that a child has been rescued or a life has been saved.
But the life of an older person is of equal value, and yet often the resources are not there to either save or sustain that life. It's often seen in conflict zones that, as the honourable gentleman said, it's the elderly that stay behind because they cannot move, they cannot be displaced, they stay in those areas. And of course, in Ukraine we have seen that. But also in so many other areas. We know from our own research that if you move when you're elderly, it will have other waits on you and can cause much confusion.
It can also have a real impact on your mental well-being. So when we see older people in those most acute areas of conflict, we are really, um, we really take on board why so many older people die in conflict because they are in direct firing line or of course, the facilities and the infrastructure which keeps them going is removed. And of course, it's not just about healthcare, it's about social care. It's about that social infrastructure, the family no longer available to to provide that support.
Even things like state provision are disrupted. Pensions no longer available. And of course, simple things like food supplies, um, are diverted into emergency and humanitarian aid. And this is why it's so important that we put older people at the front of all agendas. I say this also, chair, as the, the chair of the all party parliamentary group for ageing and Older people, a matter I take so seriously. And now, of course, with severe cuts to international aid, it makes the humanitarian response more challenging.
And I really do urge the government to return to 0.7% as a matter of urgency to provide that leadership once again, to ensure that we can provide the aid. Of course not that everyone will be able to receive, but as many people as possible, because older lives matter to. When the infrastructure breaks down, the resilience plummets. And particularly stark amongst older people. So government must be mindful of this when appraising its priorities. Government must be mindful of this when appraising its priorities, because without finance, ensuring aid has this constant concision.
And makes provision in. In food, care, medicines and support need. Government must be mindful of this when appraising its priorities because. Without financial resilience, and especially for women in conflict zones, even the basics become barriers. Ensuring aid has. This constant concision. And makes provision in. In food, care, medicines and support needs to be such a lifeline. But of course, it's not just about the fiscal impact of destitution and health consequences.
The psychological trauma must be recognised too. It is the elders who play such a pivotal role in communities and families. If their resilience is broken, so is that of their societies. In many societies to this day, women are at particular risk of violence and abuse, including sexual violence, and it has been such a taboo subject, not least amongst that generation and yet so traumatic. I recall last Ukraine Day, when in our constituency, an event was held and I heard from a Ukrainian woman and saw a film about the sexual violence being perpetrated against women in Ukraine and the horrors that that and the scars that it has left them with.
They didn't speak because of the shame it brought them. The trauma that they were going through. And yet when they started to share their stories, it brought that healing between them. But of course, without the proper support, the psychological care a wrapped around individuals, that healing doesn't come. And that's why I'm so proud again, that our Foreign Secretary has recognised that and put resource into it, particularly in the Sudan region. But for those women, we need to make sure they do access that support to.
Of course.
And of course, Japan 84.7 years. It shows that conflict shortens lives by decades through poor access to health care and pharmaceuticals, disability disruption and displacement, prevalence of disease and hastened frailty in an environment of climate change, floods and famine. Gender based violence scars the lives of its survivors and issue. I am so proud that our Foreign Secretary has rightly placed at the heart of her work. As we see the prevalence as this weapon used in war, access to health care, an issue I particularly look at here in the in the house is significantly reduced as the targeting of health facilities and health professionals has now been seen as central in many conflicts.
We've seen that happening in Gaza, and we've also seen that in Sudan, where health professionals run the risk not only in the work that they do, but are targeted by weapons to take them out. And of course, breaking the rules of just wars. But these walls, of course, are never just. But also, we have seen the shrinking capacity of healthcare against the increased demand, whether that is from the the wounds of war, but also the sharp rise we're seeing of sexual violence against women, the poor mental health which is sustained.
And as a result of that, the the access, the ability to access healthcare is reduced. And that, of course, will always impact older people. And often in war, we look at the wounds and of course we understand why, but it's the chronic conditions, the cancers, the diabetes, the other illnesses which often get forgotten, the drugs not getting through, the treatments not available, the clinicians simply diverted onto the acute phases. And of course, our hearts beat when we know that a child has been rescued or a life has been saved.
But the life of an older person is of equal value, and yet often the resources are not there to either save or sustain that life. It's often seen in conflict zones that, as the honourable gentleman said, it's the elderly that stay behind because they cannot move, they cannot be displaced, they stay in those areas. And of course, in Ukraine we have seen that. But also in so many other areas. We know from our own research that if you move when you're elderly, it will have other waits on you and can cause much confusion.
It can also have a real impact on your mental well-being. So when we see older people in those most acute areas of conflict, we are really, um, we really take on board why so many older people die in conflict because they are in direct firing line or of course, the facilities and the infrastructure which keeps them going is removed. And of course, it's not just about healthcare, it's about social care. It's about that social infrastructure, the family no longer available to to provide that support.
Even things like state provision are disrupted. Pensions no longer available. And of course, simple things like food supplies, um, are diverted into emergency and humanitarian aid. And this is why it's so important that we put older people at the front of all agendas. I say this also, chair, as the, the chair of the all party parliamentary group for ageing and Older people, a matter I take so seriously. And now, of course, with severe cuts to international aid, it makes the humanitarian response more challenging.
And I really do urge the government to return to 0.7% as a matter of urgency to provide that leadership once again, to ensure that we can provide the aid. Of course not that everyone will be able to receive, but as many people as possible, because older lives matter to. When the infrastructure breaks down, the resilience plummets. And particularly stark amongst older people. So government must be mindful of this when appraising its priorities. Government must be mindful of this when appraising its priorities, because without finance, ensuring aid has this constant concision.
And makes provision in. In food, care, medicines and support need. Government must be mindful of this when appraising its priorities because. Without financial resilience, and especially for women in conflict zones, even the basics become barriers. Ensuring aid has. This constant concision. And makes provision in. In food, care, medicines and support needs to be such a lifeline. But of course, it's not just about the fiscal impact of destitution and health consequences.
The psychological trauma must be recognised too. It is the elders who play such a pivotal role in communities and families. If their resilience is broken, so is that of their societies. In many societies to this day, women are at particular risk of violence and abuse, including sexual violence, and it has been such a taboo subject, not least amongst that generation and yet so traumatic. I recall last Ukraine Day, when in our constituency, an event was held and I heard from a Ukrainian woman and saw a film about the sexual violence being perpetrated against women in Ukraine and the horrors that that and the scars that it has left them with.
They didn't speak because of the shame it brought them. The trauma that they were going through. And yet when they started to share their stories, it brought that healing between them. But of course, without the proper support, the psychological care a wrapped around individuals, that healing doesn't come. And that's why I'm so proud again, that our Foreign Secretary has recognised that and put resource into it, particularly in the Sudan region. But for those women, we need to make sure they do access that support to.
Of course.
13:59
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
She's making a very powerful and important speech, particularly on women in Ukraine who have suffered sexual violence during war. I wonder if she agrees with me that having proper support for those women and an ability to record what they have experienced is important, not just to support them, but to make sure that when the war in Ukraine ends, that justice, as much as it can be done, is done for those people.
13:59
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
I'm really grateful to my hon. Friend raising this point because, of course, having that catalogue of war crimes being made is so important, and whether they're elderly or anyone who has experienced sexual violence or any forms of violence, it's absolutely crucial that good records are kept, because we need to be able to hold to account the perpetrators of that violence. When that opportunity arises. And of course, with older people, we know that if you don't get the right nutrition, it has such a massive impact on your ability to function.
Without the right nutrition, you can have greater episodes of confusion. Um, life can be much more challenging. You become more frail and with rapidity, then you can lose your mobility and as a result, face more complex needs. So ensuring that we see that good distribution of humanitarian aid is absolutely vital for the vulnerable. And that always factored in is that access to, um, to that targeted support, not only making sure people have got, um, the ability to, to reach that food, but that it is prepared in the right way for them as well.
And of course, in talking about some of the challenges we've seen in Sudan of late, and of course, it's a most horrendous, complex war. And, um, I'm glad that it was discussed at the NATO summit just recently and remains at the forefront of our governments, um, minds. It is very much a forgotten war. Um, in so many places. And what evidence has showed is that the elderly there have been in the direct line of violence, and it is so important that that is not forgotten either.
But older people. Not least women have a crucial role in home community. And often that roles ripples out far beyond. They are often the ones that build the bridges, build the civil society, create the pathways to peace, organise communities at their most challenged. And it's often the older women using the wisdom that they bring that are able to bring that coordination and build a way to the future. And indeed, I've been inspired by many leaders of older women who have led that charge out of conflict and into a more resilient future.
But we also must recognise there are significant challenges there. So, first of all, I really want to ask the government what they're doing to provide better protections for older people, the rights of older people as an all party parliamentary group, we undertook an inquiry into the human rights of older people, looking at what are the frameworks, the mechanisms that we can deploy in order to enhance them, protect them and ensure people were able to uphold them. And looking at the work that the UN convention has been focused on, on the rights of older people, has been inspiring very much along the lines that other rights have been established, whether around the child or disabled people, ensuring that the protected characteristic of older people is upheld.
And of course, it falls on the Foreign Office to be able to advance that work and ensure that the UK play a full role, bringing our experience into that space so that older people, um, identity can be seen and their needs particularly supported. So I asked the minister exactly what are we doing in leading that work and whether or not the UK will adopt the UN convention once it has been established, in order to ensure that women, men and older people across the piece are able to have their value recognised and their rights upheld, and having a rights based framework then moves the agenda it enables, enables us to then focus on that protected characteristic, have an inclusive specialists who can help reprioritise the humanitarian response, like changes to health or care.
But of course, making sure that we also have good data to accompany that as well. So we know exactly how to. Focus the humanitarian response we have. And of course, with regards to healthcare, ensuring pharmaceuticals and equipment are available to meet the demographic that we're talking about today in conflict areas. And when only 0.1% of humanitarian funding databases even mention older people currently, we know we have a problem. And so the Foreign Office must ensure that older people are written into all of our work.
And I seek that assurance from the minister today, and that we spread that good practice to agencies, but also other nations, too. So will the government ensure that its humanitarian response is always age inclusive and understand the risks that older people face when social infrastructure is destroyed by conflict?And will the government also ensure that it understands the distribution has to be targeted to reach the elderly, with both chronic and acute health needs?Wherever that focus is required?Will the government also promote the opportunity of social protections like Social Security, pensions amongst older people in areas of conflict zones to ensure that people are able to access the resources they need?Of course, like here, um, in many countries, um, being able to use more traditional ways of accessing those services is really important too.
And ultimately, can the government also ensure it does crunch the numbers in conflict areas to use that data to, well, design humanitarian responses, recognising the prevalence of older people and recognising the focus that they need. Finally, as I just bring my remarks to a close, I recognise that the game changer, the pivotal part in this, will be having a UN convention on the rights of older people, and I just want to make that point again, because it is about giving older people agency in conflict zones to better facilitate facilitate their participation to in humanitarian, um, planning, in peace building, monitoring and decision taking.
So I look forward to the minister's response and indeed, um, shadow Minister and the spokesperson for the Lib Dems and trust that we can rebuild our humanitarian response with good data programmes and rights to support older people in conflict.
Without the right nutrition, you can have greater episodes of confusion. Um, life can be much more challenging. You become more frail and with rapidity, then you can lose your mobility and as a result, face more complex needs. So ensuring that we see that good distribution of humanitarian aid is absolutely vital for the vulnerable. And that always factored in is that access to, um, to that targeted support, not only making sure people have got, um, the ability to, to reach that food, but that it is prepared in the right way for them as well.
And of course, in talking about some of the challenges we've seen in Sudan of late, and of course, it's a most horrendous, complex war. And, um, I'm glad that it was discussed at the NATO summit just recently and remains at the forefront of our governments, um, minds. It is very much a forgotten war. Um, in so many places. And what evidence has showed is that the elderly there have been in the direct line of violence, and it is so important that that is not forgotten either.
But older people. Not least women have a crucial role in home community. And often that roles ripples out far beyond. They are often the ones that build the bridges, build the civil society, create the pathways to peace, organise communities at their most challenged. And it's often the older women using the wisdom that they bring that are able to bring that coordination and build a way to the future. And indeed, I've been inspired by many leaders of older women who have led that charge out of conflict and into a more resilient future.
But we also must recognise there are significant challenges there. So, first of all, I really want to ask the government what they're doing to provide better protections for older people, the rights of older people as an all party parliamentary group, we undertook an inquiry into the human rights of older people, looking at what are the frameworks, the mechanisms that we can deploy in order to enhance them, protect them and ensure people were able to uphold them. And looking at the work that the UN convention has been focused on, on the rights of older people, has been inspiring very much along the lines that other rights have been established, whether around the child or disabled people, ensuring that the protected characteristic of older people is upheld.
And of course, it falls on the Foreign Office to be able to advance that work and ensure that the UK play a full role, bringing our experience into that space so that older people, um, identity can be seen and their needs particularly supported. So I asked the minister exactly what are we doing in leading that work and whether or not the UK will adopt the UN convention once it has been established, in order to ensure that women, men and older people across the piece are able to have their value recognised and their rights upheld, and having a rights based framework then moves the agenda it enables, enables us to then focus on that protected characteristic, have an inclusive specialists who can help reprioritise the humanitarian response, like changes to health or care.
But of course, making sure that we also have good data to accompany that as well. So we know exactly how to. Focus the humanitarian response we have. And of course, with regards to healthcare, ensuring pharmaceuticals and equipment are available to meet the demographic that we're talking about today in conflict areas. And when only 0.1% of humanitarian funding databases even mention older people currently, we know we have a problem. And so the Foreign Office must ensure that older people are written into all of our work.
And I seek that assurance from the minister today, and that we spread that good practice to agencies, but also other nations, too. So will the government ensure that its humanitarian response is always age inclusive and understand the risks that older people face when social infrastructure is destroyed by conflict?And will the government also ensure that it understands the distribution has to be targeted to reach the elderly, with both chronic and acute health needs?Wherever that focus is required?Will the government also promote the opportunity of social protections like Social Security, pensions amongst older people in areas of conflict zones to ensure that people are able to access the resources they need?Of course, like here, um, in many countries, um, being able to use more traditional ways of accessing those services is really important too.
And ultimately, can the government also ensure it does crunch the numbers in conflict areas to use that data to, well, design humanitarian responses, recognising the prevalence of older people and recognising the focus that they need. Finally, as I just bring my remarks to a close, I recognise that the game changer, the pivotal part in this, will be having a UN convention on the rights of older people, and I just want to make that point again, because it is about giving older people agency in conflict zones to better facilitate facilitate their participation to in humanitarian, um, planning, in peace building, monitoring and decision taking.
So I look forward to the minister's response and indeed, um, shadow Minister and the spokesperson for the Lib Dems and trust that we can rebuild our humanitarian response with good data programmes and rights to support older people in conflict.
14:06
14:07
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Betts. And it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. And I'd like to thank the honourable member for Strangford for for securing this debate and shining a light on an important but often overlooked issue. It's a strange thing to see that many of the same voices who mourn Britain's declining influence on the world stage are also the first to say that we should spend nothing beyond our own shores. They say that the 0.7% commitment to development spending was some kind of national indulgence.
We can no longer afford, but our influence never really relied on hard power alone. Our leverage in the world comes from working with others and leading by example. That is what internationalism means, and it is why the Liberal Democrats believe that the commitment to international aid is not merely sentimental, it's fundamental, it's strategic, and it rests on a simple principle of equality. We help those who need help most. I don't want to create a league table in suffering, but some groups do bear a heavier burden in humanitarian crises.
Older people, especially if they're disabled, are almost always among the most affected. When Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans in 2005, 75% of those who died were over 60. Yet older people made up only 16% of the local population. And when the Great East Japan earthquake and tsunami struck in 2011, 56% of those who lost their lives were aged 65 and over. Today is less stable than it has been in a generation since Russia's full scale invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022, 08CHOHCHR has found that older people account for almost half of all civilian deaths, where age could be verified.
Older people, especially women, remain at disproportionate risk, and that's particularly in frontline areas. So knowing all this, it is extraordinary that the Fcdo confirmed cuts to precisely the funds that support the most vulnerable groups in humanitarian response. The International Development Committee found that the Fcdo s own equality Impact Assessments concluded that Oda reductions on programming, with a strong focus on equalities is expected to be severe in South Sudan. Specifically, the committee heard that work on disability and inclusion will cease altogether and that will have a direct impact on elderly people.
UN figures show that more than 46% of people aged 60 and over live with a disability, and more than 250 million older people worldwide experience moderate to severe disability in the UK, the House of Commons Libraries analysis shows that disability prevalence rises from 23% among working age adults in the UK to 45% among adults over state pension age, and to 58% among those aged 80 and over. So when disability inclusion funding is cut in a humanitarian response, older people will therefore be hit twice over. It's not an unfortunate side effect.
It is a foreseeable and measurable consequence. I want to press the government on the false choice it keeps presenting between defence and development, particularly in the context of Ukraine. Oda budgets are part of defending Ukraine. For example, they fund in part accessible bomb bomb shelters. They fund healthcare, healthcare adaptions for people with mobility needs or age related conditions. If we are serious about supporting Ukraine, are the lives of its older citizens not part of that commitment?Liberal Democrats reject the idea that we must choose.
We have set out how defence spending can rise to 2.5% of GDP and beyond, through mechanisms like defence bonds and a higher digital services tax on the largest technology firms. And that is without hollowing out our aid budget. We advocate for the immediate restoration of Oda to 0.5% of GDP, with a clear roadmap back to 0.7%. The American example in this is not one to follow. USAID has been gutted by an administration that treats development spending as something somehow unpatriotic within the older age group, the situation of women reveals a heightened case of danger.
Amnesty International's submission to the UN independent expert on the human rights of older persons, documents this starkly in northeast Nigeria, older women displaced by Boko Haram faced particularly severe discrimination and invisibility. They were often unsuccessful when they tried to petition simply to be added to food distribution lists, and in Ukraine, women's pensions are on average 30% lower than men's, which is a consequence of shorter careers and interrupted employment caused by caregiving responsibilities. Older women also experience higher rates of disabling conditions than men of the same age, such as arthritis, arthritis, osteoporosis and frailty.
A result, older women are disproportionately exposed to poverty when displaced. Social role played by women, as mentioned by my colleague earlier as caregiver caregivers, means that if they suffer. The impact is felt by the whole extended family. If they are left without income, without accessible health care, or without a place in the food queue, the people who depend on their care feel it. Also, if the government wants to talk about return on investment in its development spending, this is exactly where that return is.
The greatest. Supporting older women is not a niche ask. It's a multiplier for entire households and communities. I'm speaking for the Liberal Democrats, but of course it's not just us. Amnesty international has set out practical deliverable recommendations. We must disaggregate humanitarian data by age, gender and disability so that we can actually see who's being missed out. And we must ensure that older people are not systematically excluded from livelihood and cash assistance programmes. On the discriminatory assumption that they cannot work.
The humanitarian inclusion standards for older people and people with disabilities, which is developed by the sector's own age and Disability Inclusion Consortium, already exist and they are freely available. I ask the Minister to confirm that the Fcdo is using them and if not, why not?So to conclude, Liberal, the Liberal Democrats believe that this government does not need new evidence to act. It needs to start listening to the evidence. It already has. It needs to listen to its own equality impact assessments rather than commissioning them, and then quietly setting them aside, as has happened all too often in previous rounds of cuts.
It needs to make use of the evidence based inclusion standards that the It needs to make use of the evidence based inclusion standards that the humanitarian sector has already built, rather than trying to reinvent the wheel or indeed, ignoring it altogether. And of course, it needs to restore Oda to first 0.5% of GNI with a published roadmap back to 0.7%, so that the targeted programs reaching older people and older women in particular, are not the first thing to be sacrificed when budgets tighten. I look forward to the minister's response.
Thank you.
We can no longer afford, but our influence never really relied on hard power alone. Our leverage in the world comes from working with others and leading by example. That is what internationalism means, and it is why the Liberal Democrats believe that the commitment to international aid is not merely sentimental, it's fundamental, it's strategic, and it rests on a simple principle of equality. We help those who need help most. I don't want to create a league table in suffering, but some groups do bear a heavier burden in humanitarian crises.
Older people, especially if they're disabled, are almost always among the most affected. When Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans in 2005, 75% of those who died were over 60. Yet older people made up only 16% of the local population. And when the Great East Japan earthquake and tsunami struck in 2011, 56% of those who lost their lives were aged 65 and over. Today is less stable than it has been in a generation since Russia's full scale invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022, 08CHOHCHR has found that older people account for almost half of all civilian deaths, where age could be verified.
Older people, especially women, remain at disproportionate risk, and that's particularly in frontline areas. So knowing all this, it is extraordinary that the Fcdo confirmed cuts to precisely the funds that support the most vulnerable groups in humanitarian response. The International Development Committee found that the Fcdo s own equality Impact Assessments concluded that Oda reductions on programming, with a strong focus on equalities is expected to be severe in South Sudan. Specifically, the committee heard that work on disability and inclusion will cease altogether and that will have a direct impact on elderly people.
UN figures show that more than 46% of people aged 60 and over live with a disability, and more than 250 million older people worldwide experience moderate to severe disability in the UK, the House of Commons Libraries analysis shows that disability prevalence rises from 23% among working age adults in the UK to 45% among adults over state pension age, and to 58% among those aged 80 and over. So when disability inclusion funding is cut in a humanitarian response, older people will therefore be hit twice over. It's not an unfortunate side effect.
It is a foreseeable and measurable consequence. I want to press the government on the false choice it keeps presenting between defence and development, particularly in the context of Ukraine. Oda budgets are part of defending Ukraine. For example, they fund in part accessible bomb bomb shelters. They fund healthcare, healthcare adaptions for people with mobility needs or age related conditions. If we are serious about supporting Ukraine, are the lives of its older citizens not part of that commitment?Liberal Democrats reject the idea that we must choose.
We have set out how defence spending can rise to 2.5% of GDP and beyond, through mechanisms like defence bonds and a higher digital services tax on the largest technology firms. And that is without hollowing out our aid budget. We advocate for the immediate restoration of Oda to 0.5% of GDP, with a clear roadmap back to 0.7%. The American example in this is not one to follow. USAID has been gutted by an administration that treats development spending as something somehow unpatriotic within the older age group, the situation of women reveals a heightened case of danger.
Amnesty International's submission to the UN independent expert on the human rights of older persons, documents this starkly in northeast Nigeria, older women displaced by Boko Haram faced particularly severe discrimination and invisibility. They were often unsuccessful when they tried to petition simply to be added to food distribution lists, and in Ukraine, women's pensions are on average 30% lower than men's, which is a consequence of shorter careers and interrupted employment caused by caregiving responsibilities. Older women also experience higher rates of disabling conditions than men of the same age, such as arthritis, arthritis, osteoporosis and frailty.
A result, older women are disproportionately exposed to poverty when displaced. Social role played by women, as mentioned by my colleague earlier as caregiver caregivers, means that if they suffer. The impact is felt by the whole extended family. If they are left without income, without accessible health care, or without a place in the food queue, the people who depend on their care feel it. Also, if the government wants to talk about return on investment in its development spending, this is exactly where that return is.
The greatest. Supporting older women is not a niche ask. It's a multiplier for entire households and communities. I'm speaking for the Liberal Democrats, but of course it's not just us. Amnesty international has set out practical deliverable recommendations. We must disaggregate humanitarian data by age, gender and disability so that we can actually see who's being missed out. And we must ensure that older people are not systematically excluded from livelihood and cash assistance programmes. On the discriminatory assumption that they cannot work.
The humanitarian inclusion standards for older people and people with disabilities, which is developed by the sector's own age and Disability Inclusion Consortium, already exist and they are freely available. I ask the Minister to confirm that the Fcdo is using them and if not, why not?So to conclude, Liberal, the Liberal Democrats believe that this government does not need new evidence to act. It needs to start listening to the evidence. It already has. It needs to listen to its own equality impact assessments rather than commissioning them, and then quietly setting them aside, as has happened all too often in previous rounds of cuts.
It needs to make use of the evidence based inclusion standards that the It needs to make use of the evidence based inclusion standards that the humanitarian sector has already built, rather than trying to reinvent the wheel or indeed, ignoring it altogether. And of course, it needs to restore Oda to first 0.5% of GNI with a published roadmap back to 0.7%, so that the targeted programs reaching older people and older women in particular, are not the first thing to be sacrificed when budgets tighten. I look forward to the minister's response.
Thank you.
14:14
14:15
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Thank you very much, Mr. Betts. It is a pleasure once again to serve with you in the chair, and I thank the honourable member for Strangford for bringing this debate. Although the last debate that the honourable member brought, that I contributed into was a few weeks ago on stoma care, when we managed to get some rather interesting entries into Hansard when we were giving out the names that people give to their stomas, some of them quite inappropriate. But actually in that debate, that was quite interesting, which connects through to this is the way in which conditions do affect older people in different ways, and particularly, therefore, if you translate that and for example, the exam, the way we had that debate, um, a few weeks ago about people with Stomas and how older people with Stomas have very specific care needs, um, and how that would translate into a war zone or into a refugee camp can give you an example, very much of how that's suffering, um, would be great.
And, uh, and as always, through referencing his constituent Margaret, um, he brings to life the fact that whilst we often in these debates talk about statistics and we talk about facts and we talk in broad terms, each of those are indeed a person with their own story to tell, um, and their own suffering. Um, I thank the honourable member for York Central for her contribution and um, for her long standing commitments. I've been in a number of debates, um, where the honourable member has spoken and whilst um, I have a different view to her in terms of um aid spending and support the government's position, I do recognise that she has long standing and very sincerely held views on this subject.
And debates like this are where those views can be exchanged. Um and she has remained consistent in her views and advocated for them over a number of time. Um, I shall break the jolly consensus just to respond to one little bit. Um, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson brought forward about this whole idea that we can use defence bonds as a magic answer for defence spending, and means that then we would have to make no cuts whatsoever to the aid budget and get it back up to 0.7%, with no worrying.
Borrowing costs are at the highest levels they have been in decades, and the bond market is not a great place at this moment in time. And you still have to pay bonds back. And what we've not seen from the Liberal Democrats yet is any understanding of how those bonds would be paid back and how those ever increasing borrowing costs would be factored into that. And therefore, I don't think it is as simple as just take out a few extra bonds and all will be fine with the international aid budget.
I happily give way.
And, uh, and as always, through referencing his constituent Margaret, um, he brings to life the fact that whilst we often in these debates talk about statistics and we talk about facts and we talk in broad terms, each of those are indeed a person with their own story to tell, um, and their own suffering. Um, I thank the honourable member for York Central for her contribution and um, for her long standing commitments. I've been in a number of debates, um, where the honourable member has spoken and whilst um, I have a different view to her in terms of um aid spending and support the government's position, I do recognise that she has long standing and very sincerely held views on this subject.
And debates like this are where those views can be exchanged. Um and she has remained consistent in her views and advocated for them over a number of time. Um, I shall break the jolly consensus just to respond to one little bit. Um, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson brought forward about this whole idea that we can use defence bonds as a magic answer for defence spending, and means that then we would have to make no cuts whatsoever to the aid budget and get it back up to 0.7%, with no worrying.
Borrowing costs are at the highest levels they have been in decades, and the bond market is not a great place at this moment in time. And you still have to pay bonds back. And what we've not seen from the Liberal Democrats yet is any understanding of how those bonds would be paid back and how those ever increasing borrowing costs would be factored into that. And therefore, I don't think it is as simple as just take out a few extra bonds and all will be fine with the international aid budget.
I happily give way.
14:17
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
I thank the honourable member for giving way. There is no easy fix, that is for sure. But of course the the the the borrowing or the loans that are not coming from the bond markets. They're coming from British people. So so we're not imposing on or demanding on the bond market. I do think that is a different they have difference. They have been used successfully in the past.
14:18
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Uh, indeed, I hold government bonds myself, so I should probably declare an interest at this moment in time, as I'm sure many people do. But as we know those, the interest rates, um, that all bonds are generally driven by um, is by the, the headline interest rates and the bond markets overall. Otherwise the government would just borrow from the public every single time. Um, and it isn't that simple. And there are knock on effects of doing that as well, particularly if there's a reason why premium bonds are capped, which is because you're moving people's money out of taxable savings into non-taxable savings, and it hits the Treasury somewhere else.
So it isn't as it isn't as straightforward, um, as, as, as as is, is, is, is, is, um, is presented by that, um, to get to the actual subject. Um, it is evident that we are currently living in a more dangerous world than any time in our recent past. Humanitarian crises in Africa are exacerbated by the actions of governments. War in the Middle East with the terrorist regime in Tehran hell bent on causing chaos and instability, Putin's illegal invasion of Ukraine signalled the end of the post war peace dividend and brought the realities of war to Europe once again.
Evidence shows that conflict disproportionately affects older people. As the member for Strangford has highlighted, almost half of the civilian deaths in the conflict in in Ukraine are persons older than 60. Despite this demographic constituting about one quarter of the population, older people are more likely to remain in conflict zones because they have strong ties to their homes, lands and territories, or because they are physically more limited. It is with this in mind that we must seek to ensure our overseas aid is targeted at those who need it the most.
With budgets properly scrutinised and value for money sought in every penny spent. Whilst many will want to discuss the size of the budget, it is equally important that we consider reforming the budget and improving the way the existing budget is spent. How can we ensure that every pound we spend overseas delivers the greatest possible benefit for the British people?Our national security, our prosperity and health, as well as for the recipients abroad?With approximately 1.9 million pensioners living in the UK in relative poverty, we owe it to them to ensure that the money we send abroad is money well spent.
That is why, throughout this debate we must ask ourselves what is the best way to deliver for the needs of older people?We also must deliver a message to older people, both at home and in conflict areas overseas, that we see them, we hear them, and we are here for them when needed. We have given numerous reminders. We are given numerous reminders of older people's vulnerabilities to conflict over recent years. In 2020, elderly Armenians who stayed in Nagorno-Karabakh were subject to summary executions.
Indeed, older people made up more than half of the Armenian civilian deaths. We saw this trend again in Myanmar. Older Rohingya who stayed in in the face of advances were killed and tortured. Some people indicate that the highest rates of Rohingya deaths are among people aged 50 and older. It is no surprise, though nevertheless shocking, to see the suffering Putin's illegal invasion has caused older Ukrainians. As previously mentioned, Ukrainians over 60 make up only 25% of their country's population, yet they account for nearly half of the civilian deaths and more than a third of the injuries in frontline communities.
The UN refugee agency polled older Ukrainians who who remained in or near Russian occupied areas last year. They found that many older Ukrainians stayed because they lacked an alternative. Indeed, 20% of the respondents said they would not evacuate because they felt helpless and did not know where to get the help they needed. Many felt they would have nothing left if they evacuated. There is an opportunity to think outside the box on how we assist older people in conflict areas. For example, we know many older people's finances stopped them from evacuating.
Ukraine and Poland have innovated and agreed a mechanism to allow refugees access to their pensions. Is the minister discussing similar proposals with counterparts in war torn countries elsewhere in the world, where this could possibly be replicated?Sighted older people. Related issues, related reasons for poor health as a reason for not evacuating their homes. After all, older displaced Ukrainians are more likely to report difficulties accessing healthcare. I would therefore like to ask the minister how his department is working with our humanitarian partners to make clear to older people who want to evacuate how they can access this help, and what steps are the government taking to ensure internally displaced peoples are able to return home when appropriate, rather than being a rather than being forced to seek to seek refuge in another country.
Displaced older people in Sudan report difficulties accessing information on essential services. Many older Syrians remained in war torn areas to continue accessing healthcare. Some older Syrians are now returning to those same war torn areas in search of more affordable and accessible healthcare. With this in mind, what steps are the government taking to ensure best practice on healthcare is shared?Of course, evacuating older people from conflict zones is only the first step. These people can be vulnerable at every stage.
Many older people are not mobile enough to reach official displacement camps. Some stop at unofficial locations. These are often overcrowded and have inadequate access to essentials. Some older people become separated from their families while evacuating. They are vulnerable, particularly those with dementia, to becoming lost in institutional systems. Some evacuated. Older people struggle to register their presence at displacement camps. They often lack official documents, and registration points can be inaccessible. They can miss out on aid distribution and medical care.
As a result, the. National landscape is sadly defined by conflict and instability. Older. Older people in conflict threaten zones, continue to be vulnerable. Problems accessing help, healthcare and finances persist. The government has an opportunity to support older people affected by conflict. This will involve working with our partners to find new solutions and address the specific needs that older people have, as part of a wider programme of meaningful reform. I hope the Minister will explain how his department is meeting the realities of our most dangerous world.
I look forward to his response to my questions. And indeed, as we would have expected, the very detailed requests from the honourable member for Strangford.
So it isn't as it isn't as straightforward, um, as, as, as as is, is, is, is, is, um, is presented by that, um, to get to the actual subject. Um, it is evident that we are currently living in a more dangerous world than any time in our recent past. Humanitarian crises in Africa are exacerbated by the actions of governments. War in the Middle East with the terrorist regime in Tehran hell bent on causing chaos and instability, Putin's illegal invasion of Ukraine signalled the end of the post war peace dividend and brought the realities of war to Europe once again.
Evidence shows that conflict disproportionately affects older people. As the member for Strangford has highlighted, almost half of the civilian deaths in the conflict in in Ukraine are persons older than 60. Despite this demographic constituting about one quarter of the population, older people are more likely to remain in conflict zones because they have strong ties to their homes, lands and territories, or because they are physically more limited. It is with this in mind that we must seek to ensure our overseas aid is targeted at those who need it the most.
With budgets properly scrutinised and value for money sought in every penny spent. Whilst many will want to discuss the size of the budget, it is equally important that we consider reforming the budget and improving the way the existing budget is spent. How can we ensure that every pound we spend overseas delivers the greatest possible benefit for the British people?Our national security, our prosperity and health, as well as for the recipients abroad?With approximately 1.9 million pensioners living in the UK in relative poverty, we owe it to them to ensure that the money we send abroad is money well spent.
That is why, throughout this debate we must ask ourselves what is the best way to deliver for the needs of older people?We also must deliver a message to older people, both at home and in conflict areas overseas, that we see them, we hear them, and we are here for them when needed. We have given numerous reminders. We are given numerous reminders of older people's vulnerabilities to conflict over recent years. In 2020, elderly Armenians who stayed in Nagorno-Karabakh were subject to summary executions.
Indeed, older people made up more than half of the Armenian civilian deaths. We saw this trend again in Myanmar. Older Rohingya who stayed in in the face of advances were killed and tortured. Some people indicate that the highest rates of Rohingya deaths are among people aged 50 and older. It is no surprise, though nevertheless shocking, to see the suffering Putin's illegal invasion has caused older Ukrainians. As previously mentioned, Ukrainians over 60 make up only 25% of their country's population, yet they account for nearly half of the civilian deaths and more than a third of the injuries in frontline communities.
The UN refugee agency polled older Ukrainians who who remained in or near Russian occupied areas last year. They found that many older Ukrainians stayed because they lacked an alternative. Indeed, 20% of the respondents said they would not evacuate because they felt helpless and did not know where to get the help they needed. Many felt they would have nothing left if they evacuated. There is an opportunity to think outside the box on how we assist older people in conflict areas. For example, we know many older people's finances stopped them from evacuating.
Ukraine and Poland have innovated and agreed a mechanism to allow refugees access to their pensions. Is the minister discussing similar proposals with counterparts in war torn countries elsewhere in the world, where this could possibly be replicated?Sighted older people. Related issues, related reasons for poor health as a reason for not evacuating their homes. After all, older displaced Ukrainians are more likely to report difficulties accessing healthcare. I would therefore like to ask the minister how his department is working with our humanitarian partners to make clear to older people who want to evacuate how they can access this help, and what steps are the government taking to ensure internally displaced peoples are able to return home when appropriate, rather than being a rather than being forced to seek to seek refuge in another country.
Displaced older people in Sudan report difficulties accessing information on essential services. Many older Syrians remained in war torn areas to continue accessing healthcare. Some older Syrians are now returning to those same war torn areas in search of more affordable and accessible healthcare. With this in mind, what steps are the government taking to ensure best practice on healthcare is shared?Of course, evacuating older people from conflict zones is only the first step. These people can be vulnerable at every stage.
Many older people are not mobile enough to reach official displacement camps. Some stop at unofficial locations. These are often overcrowded and have inadequate access to essentials. Some older people become separated from their families while evacuating. They are vulnerable, particularly those with dementia, to becoming lost in institutional systems. Some evacuated. Older people struggle to register their presence at displacement camps. They often lack official documents, and registration points can be inaccessible. They can miss out on aid distribution and medical care.
As a result, the. National landscape is sadly defined by conflict and instability. Older. Older people in conflict threaten zones, continue to be vulnerable. Problems accessing help, healthcare and finances persist. The government has an opportunity to support older people affected by conflict. This will involve working with our partners to find new solutions and address the specific needs that older people have, as part of a wider programme of meaningful reform. I hope the Minister will explain how his department is meeting the realities of our most dangerous world.
I look forward to his response to my questions. And indeed, as we would have expected, the very detailed requests from the honourable member for Strangford.
14:26
14:26
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
Thank you very much indeed, Mr. Betts. It's a pleasure to serve with you in the chair. Can I start by thanking the honourable member for Strangford for securing this debate?And if the House didn't need any more confirmation that he comes from good stock, may I wish his mother a very happy birthday for next week. I think anyone reaching their 90s is a great achievement, so it is no surprise to me that the honourable gentleman's mum will be reaching those great milestones in age.
Can I thank my hon. Friend the member for York Central for her contribution in particular. I know having worked with her over many years, how much she cares about these issues and has always been steadfast and utterly consistent in her views in supporting older people, not just in the UK but internationally. Can I start, Mr. Betts, in the more broader sense of the debate around the honourable gentleman's constituent, Margaret?I speak often in international fora as multilateral, multinational minister about the issues around peace building, around conflict resolution, and I talk often about Northern Ireland.
I think it is often forgotten that we've had conflict on our own shores that lasted for decades. And a lot of the peace building that followed was from women, and often from older people who lived through the entire period of the troubles. And I think we forget that we have much to celebrate in terms of the work of the peace process in Northern Ireland, but also more broadly of the impact that that conflict has had and still has on many of his constituents and people across Northern Ireland.
And I pay tribute to Margaret for, I'm sure, what must be a fascinating conversation for him as her local MP. The Foreign Secretary has been clear that tackling humanitarian need and reducing the violence caused by conflict and atrocities is a key priority for the Foreign Office, and we are committed to delivering the vision for a reformed humanitarian system, which has been set out by the emergency relief coordinator, Tom Fletcher, to build a system which is focused on the most vulnerable and prioritised the views of communities affected by crisis, the needs of older people must be central to that work.
Too often when we think about the human cost of war, we think first of children separated from their families, women and girls facing violence, or communities forced from their homes. We should continue to do so, but we should also recognise that older people are among those hardest hit by conflict, and yet they remain largely invisible. At the same time, older people are not one homogenous group. Age alone does not make someone vulnerable. Many continue to lead, care for others and support their communities, even in the most difficult of circumstances.
That is why we must take three steps to address the humanitarian impact of conflict on older people. First, we must recognise that older people can be disproportionately affected by conflict. Today, more than 100 armed conflicts are taking place around the world, from Sudan and Ukraine to Myanmar and Gaza. The experiences of older women and men are too often missing from discussions, data and humanitarian planning. Many are unable to flee when violence erupts. Older people are often hardest hit in crisis.
Many depend on regular medicines and health care, as has been mentioned by the honourable gentleman, my honourable friend. So disruptions can quickly become life threatening. Poor health, disability, limited mobility or caring responsibilities can leave older people trapped in conflict zones long after others have escaped. Others become separated from family members and support networks of which they rely. Yet humanitarian assistance is frequently designed without adequately considering their specific needs. This creates barriers to getting food, water and basic services.
Older people also face greater risk of neglect, abuse and exclusion, with older women in particular often facing additional and intersecting challenges linked to age, disability and gender. That is why the UK consistently presses all parties to the conflict to uphold international humanitarian law and allow rapid, unimpeded humanitarian access to all those in need, including older people. But this alone is not enough. As we as we mentioned by members across the House today, we must work proactively to understand and integrate the needs and perspectives of older people into humanitarian responses.
For many years, humanitarian actors have highlighted the lack of systematic data on the needs and experiences of older people during crises. Without data, needs are often overlooked. Without visibility, resources are not allocated, and without representation, policies and programmes risk being developed without the participation of those affected. That is why the UK is taking practical action through our humanitarian programs and partnerships, to build the evidence base to inform effective responses. I know members across the House have raised this point today on data, so I hope to answer as much as I can on this particular point that I know is of concern.
We work with UN agencies, the international Red cross, the Red Crescent Movement and non-governmental organisations to support humanitarian responses that take account of age, disability and other barriers people may face. We also encourage partners to collect and use age disaggregated data, so assistance is informed by evidence and reaches those who might otherwise be invisible within humanitarian responses. This is not simply a technical point, as has been mentioned by the honourable gentleman, it helps determine whether food distribution points are accessible, where the healthcare reaches those with chronic conditions, where the shelters are sustainable, and whether protection services are identifying those most at risk.
In Gaza, for example, the UK has funded assistive products for people injured in conflicts. Each kit can provide practical, life changing support for hundreds of people. For an older person, it can be the difference between being left behind and reaching safety, medical care and essential services. Third, we cannot just look through the lens of vulnerability but must recognise older people across the world as leaders, caregivers and contributors to community resilience. Many continue to care for grandchildren, support neighbours and maintain community networks and help others navigate crises.
Humanitarian and conflict responses are more effective when older persons are involved in decisions that affect their lives and those of their broader community, their knowledge and networks can make responses more effective, more trusted and more sustainable. I want, as we've gone through the debate today, to try and answer some of the more specific points that have been raised by honourable members. My hon. Friend the member for York Central is right to raise Sudan. It is the greatest humanitarian crisis of our age, and the Foreign Secretary, the Deputy Prime Minister as Foreign Secretary and indeed Lord Cameron of the other place, have spent the last four years leading the work internationally and multilaterally and bilaterally to ensure that Sudan remains high on the agenda.
In February of this year, when we chaired the Security Council as the UK government, the Foreign Secretary chaired a special session purely focusing on Sudan and across. Since February, including at the NATO summit with the Foreign Secretary, gave a statement to the floor of the House today where she was able to update the House on the issues around Sudan and the fact that the UK is leading the conversation on trying to bring a peaceful resolution to the conflict. We always need to do more to highlight, to broadcast what is taking place in Sudan because it.
Is truly important that we find a resolution that brings about a ceasefire and of course, back to peaceful stability. My honourable friend for York Central, Mr. Betts, made a particular point around older women that are not overlooked in conflict. And the honourable member for Strangford talked about women in relation to the atrocities of sexual violence being used in conflict and as a weapon of war. I want to reassure the House that we do support women led and women rights projects and organisations that recognise that they are often the most trusted actors in helping to identify those victims of sexual violence, but also of the risk specifically faced by older women, including widows, carers, women with disabilities and women separated from family support.
And particularly as the envoy within my role as minister for protecting sexual violence, preventing sexual violence in conflict, and we have a women, peace and security, wider commitments that focus, as well as on younger women and girls, but also on older women as well, and making sure that there are support for survivors. Because my honourable friend, who is now not in his place. Member for Glasgow South, made the point that evidence gathering and justice and retribution because of these heinous crimes of sexual violence in conflict, we work as a UK government to ensure that evidence is gathered.
We work as a government to make sure that hopefully, in the near future, when we have peace in Ukraine, in Sudan and in other conflicts, that there is accountability for the crimes against those people who have committed sexual violence acts in the name of conflict. I will give way happily.
Can I thank my hon. Friend the member for York Central for her contribution in particular. I know having worked with her over many years, how much she cares about these issues and has always been steadfast and utterly consistent in her views in supporting older people, not just in the UK but internationally. Can I start, Mr. Betts, in the more broader sense of the debate around the honourable gentleman's constituent, Margaret?I speak often in international fora as multilateral, multinational minister about the issues around peace building, around conflict resolution, and I talk often about Northern Ireland.
I think it is often forgotten that we've had conflict on our own shores that lasted for decades. And a lot of the peace building that followed was from women, and often from older people who lived through the entire period of the troubles. And I think we forget that we have much to celebrate in terms of the work of the peace process in Northern Ireland, but also more broadly of the impact that that conflict has had and still has on many of his constituents and people across Northern Ireland.
And I pay tribute to Margaret for, I'm sure, what must be a fascinating conversation for him as her local MP. The Foreign Secretary has been clear that tackling humanitarian need and reducing the violence caused by conflict and atrocities is a key priority for the Foreign Office, and we are committed to delivering the vision for a reformed humanitarian system, which has been set out by the emergency relief coordinator, Tom Fletcher, to build a system which is focused on the most vulnerable and prioritised the views of communities affected by crisis, the needs of older people must be central to that work.
Too often when we think about the human cost of war, we think first of children separated from their families, women and girls facing violence, or communities forced from their homes. We should continue to do so, but we should also recognise that older people are among those hardest hit by conflict, and yet they remain largely invisible. At the same time, older people are not one homogenous group. Age alone does not make someone vulnerable. Many continue to lead, care for others and support their communities, even in the most difficult of circumstances.
That is why we must take three steps to address the humanitarian impact of conflict on older people. First, we must recognise that older people can be disproportionately affected by conflict. Today, more than 100 armed conflicts are taking place around the world, from Sudan and Ukraine to Myanmar and Gaza. The experiences of older women and men are too often missing from discussions, data and humanitarian planning. Many are unable to flee when violence erupts. Older people are often hardest hit in crisis.
Many depend on regular medicines and health care, as has been mentioned by the honourable gentleman, my honourable friend. So disruptions can quickly become life threatening. Poor health, disability, limited mobility or caring responsibilities can leave older people trapped in conflict zones long after others have escaped. Others become separated from family members and support networks of which they rely. Yet humanitarian assistance is frequently designed without adequately considering their specific needs. This creates barriers to getting food, water and basic services.
Older people also face greater risk of neglect, abuse and exclusion, with older women in particular often facing additional and intersecting challenges linked to age, disability and gender. That is why the UK consistently presses all parties to the conflict to uphold international humanitarian law and allow rapid, unimpeded humanitarian access to all those in need, including older people. But this alone is not enough. As we as we mentioned by members across the House today, we must work proactively to understand and integrate the needs and perspectives of older people into humanitarian responses.
For many years, humanitarian actors have highlighted the lack of systematic data on the needs and experiences of older people during crises. Without data, needs are often overlooked. Without visibility, resources are not allocated, and without representation, policies and programmes risk being developed without the participation of those affected. That is why the UK is taking practical action through our humanitarian programs and partnerships, to build the evidence base to inform effective responses. I know members across the House have raised this point today on data, so I hope to answer as much as I can on this particular point that I know is of concern.
We work with UN agencies, the international Red cross, the Red Crescent Movement and non-governmental organisations to support humanitarian responses that take account of age, disability and other barriers people may face. We also encourage partners to collect and use age disaggregated data, so assistance is informed by evidence and reaches those who might otherwise be invisible within humanitarian responses. This is not simply a technical point, as has been mentioned by the honourable gentleman, it helps determine whether food distribution points are accessible, where the healthcare reaches those with chronic conditions, where the shelters are sustainable, and whether protection services are identifying those most at risk.
In Gaza, for example, the UK has funded assistive products for people injured in conflicts. Each kit can provide practical, life changing support for hundreds of people. For an older person, it can be the difference between being left behind and reaching safety, medical care and essential services. Third, we cannot just look through the lens of vulnerability but must recognise older people across the world as leaders, caregivers and contributors to community resilience. Many continue to care for grandchildren, support neighbours and maintain community networks and help others navigate crises.
Humanitarian and conflict responses are more effective when older persons are involved in decisions that affect their lives and those of their broader community, their knowledge and networks can make responses more effective, more trusted and more sustainable. I want, as we've gone through the debate today, to try and answer some of the more specific points that have been raised by honourable members. My hon. Friend the member for York Central is right to raise Sudan. It is the greatest humanitarian crisis of our age, and the Foreign Secretary, the Deputy Prime Minister as Foreign Secretary and indeed Lord Cameron of the other place, have spent the last four years leading the work internationally and multilaterally and bilaterally to ensure that Sudan remains high on the agenda.
In February of this year, when we chaired the Security Council as the UK government, the Foreign Secretary chaired a special session purely focusing on Sudan and across. Since February, including at the NATO summit with the Foreign Secretary, gave a statement to the floor of the House today where she was able to update the House on the issues around Sudan and the fact that the UK is leading the conversation on trying to bring a peaceful resolution to the conflict. We always need to do more to highlight, to broadcast what is taking place in Sudan because it.
Is truly important that we find a resolution that brings about a ceasefire and of course, back to peaceful stability. My honourable friend for York Central, Mr. Betts, made a particular point around older women that are not overlooked in conflict. And the honourable member for Strangford talked about women in relation to the atrocities of sexual violence being used in conflict and as a weapon of war. I want to reassure the House that we do support women led and women rights projects and organisations that recognise that they are often the most trusted actors in helping to identify those victims of sexual violence, but also of the risk specifically faced by older women, including widows, carers, women with disabilities and women separated from family support.
And particularly as the envoy within my role as minister for protecting sexual violence, preventing sexual violence in conflict, and we have a women, peace and security, wider commitments that focus, as well as on younger women and girls, but also on older women as well, and making sure that there are support for survivors. Because my honourable friend, who is now not in his place. Member for Glasgow South, made the point that evidence gathering and justice and retribution because of these heinous crimes of sexual violence in conflict, we work as a UK government to ensure that evidence is gathered.
We work as a government to make sure that hopefully, in the near future, when we have peace in Ukraine, in Sudan and in other conflicts, that there is accountability for the crimes against those people who have committed sexual violence acts in the name of conflict. I will give way happily.
14:34
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
For his contribution and for his response. So far, I did mention about the those who are of an older generation, who are the custodians of the community's faith and culture. They're the ones who hold the memory of worship, of tradition and identity, the heartbeat of the of the congregation, the lifeblood of the community. And they are targeted. Can the minister give us some some reassurance in relation to those women and men, the older ones who are also targeted because of their religious belief sexually as well?That there would be help for them in relation to their retaining and, and ensuring that they have their religious beliefs.
Uh, protected within what government is trying to do. Please. Thank you.
Uh, protected within what government is trying to do. Please. Thank you.
14:35
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
Thank you, Mr. Bates. Can I say to him to offer that reassurance, he knows that I have a personal commitment to working with our freedom of religion and belief. Envoy, the member for North Northumberland, who never shies away from the particular point that he is raising, and nor will I as minister. I think he raises a wider point that my hon. Friend for York Central also raised around the work of supporting and working with older people in peace building and resolution.
I want to reassure him and the House that we. We have an instinctive view as a Department of locally led, inclusive peace building that needs to include elders, older women, older men who understand many of the challenges in the community because part of the need for that support is that they bring trust, knowledge. They are leaders in their communities, whether of faith or of none. I say to the honourable gentleman, it's extremely important that older people are part of that peace building resolution and to ensure that often, in many cases, where older people are engaged in peace building, the process actually lasts longer.
That's particularly true of women, where women take part in peace building. And there is there is many, many, much, much evidence that there is many years of peace that follows. So it's extremely important to us as a government that that work continues. Um, a number of members have mentioned Ukraine, including the Liberal Democrat spokesperson. Can I reassure the House that the budgets on overseas development and indeed for additional support through the 100 year partnership have been protected specifically on Ukraine, Gaza, additional support for Lebanon and for Sudan.
And I want to just sort of reiterate that point, because it's extremely important. The House will also know that Ukraine is also disproportionately affects a huge number of older people. As the honourable member for Strangford talked about, and there is some concerning data that the suffering is disproportionate for civilian casualties, accounting for more than 45% of civilian deaths. These are real people, not just statistics, but it does show the incredible impact that conflict does have on older people across Ukraine. And there are specific pieces of work that we do to support older people.
And a number of colleagues have raised the issue around assistance and pensions, and I wanted to try and offer some clarity on that. Through the UK government's partnership with the UNHCR and with Unicef, we are supporting the government of Ukraine in relation to strengthening national social protection systems. We are also trying to do that work so that it has more specific support for winter cash assistance. We're also trying to make sure that older people have more support in power outages. So the work that we do as a government is focused in many of these areas where there is adverse impact on older people.
There has been much conversation this afternoon, Mr. Betts, on data, and I wanted to reassure the House that the Fcdo partners should use disaggregated data, including on sex, age and disability, to understand who is being reached and, crucially, who is missing out on the support. So I just wanted to sort of make sure that was very much on the record because part of the reason for this expectation is that when considering age related barriers, we are talking about the the risks linked to disability on based on gender poverty, health, isolation, displacement, and other forms of marginalisation.
So that expectation is very much set out by the Department. In my time as a minister, Mr. Betts, I've never been given a list of questions in advance by the member moving the moving the debate, and I think I've tried where I can to answer each of them, but I have tried as we go along, to make sure I haven't missed anything. The one couple of. Couple of points, Mr. Betts, on this, if I may. One is around the violence against women and girls response, and to reassure the honourable gentleman that older women are part of that work.
As I said earlier in my speech. But just to make that very clear point, that it's not about forgetting any women that are victims of sexual violence, it's about trying to be as inclusive as we can to offer support to victims in recovery, but also to try and prevent this sexual violence in conflict. Both my honourable friend, the honourable gentleman, raised the UN convention on the Rights of Older Persons to recognise older people and and their legacies. Can I confirm, as I have done in Pqrs and into various colleagues who've written to me in my time in this role, we are supportive of the UN Convention on Older Persons.
There are many, many existing support mechanisms for older people within the UN multilateral system. That doesn't mean to say that it shouldn't come through in some form of convention, but when that does happen and those negotiations are ongoing, I do hope I can't give a cast iron guarantee in the sense of who will be the minister. Um, but. But but to be clear, there is genuine support across HMG to ensure that we do support the work of that of that resolution in supporting older people.
Gladly.
I want to reassure him and the House that we. We have an instinctive view as a Department of locally led, inclusive peace building that needs to include elders, older women, older men who understand many of the challenges in the community because part of the need for that support is that they bring trust, knowledge. They are leaders in their communities, whether of faith or of none. I say to the honourable gentleman, it's extremely important that older people are part of that peace building resolution and to ensure that often, in many cases, where older people are engaged in peace building, the process actually lasts longer.
That's particularly true of women, where women take part in peace building. And there is there is many, many, much, much evidence that there is many years of peace that follows. So it's extremely important to us as a government that that work continues. Um, a number of members have mentioned Ukraine, including the Liberal Democrat spokesperson. Can I reassure the House that the budgets on overseas development and indeed for additional support through the 100 year partnership have been protected specifically on Ukraine, Gaza, additional support for Lebanon and for Sudan.
And I want to just sort of reiterate that point, because it's extremely important. The House will also know that Ukraine is also disproportionately affects a huge number of older people. As the honourable member for Strangford talked about, and there is some concerning data that the suffering is disproportionate for civilian casualties, accounting for more than 45% of civilian deaths. These are real people, not just statistics, but it does show the incredible impact that conflict does have on older people across Ukraine. And there are specific pieces of work that we do to support older people.
And a number of colleagues have raised the issue around assistance and pensions, and I wanted to try and offer some clarity on that. Through the UK government's partnership with the UNHCR and with Unicef, we are supporting the government of Ukraine in relation to strengthening national social protection systems. We are also trying to do that work so that it has more specific support for winter cash assistance. We're also trying to make sure that older people have more support in power outages. So the work that we do as a government is focused in many of these areas where there is adverse impact on older people.
There has been much conversation this afternoon, Mr. Betts, on data, and I wanted to reassure the House that the Fcdo partners should use disaggregated data, including on sex, age and disability, to understand who is being reached and, crucially, who is missing out on the support. So I just wanted to sort of make sure that was very much on the record because part of the reason for this expectation is that when considering age related barriers, we are talking about the the risks linked to disability on based on gender poverty, health, isolation, displacement, and other forms of marginalisation.
So that expectation is very much set out by the Department. In my time as a minister, Mr. Betts, I've never been given a list of questions in advance by the member moving the moving the debate, and I think I've tried where I can to answer each of them, but I have tried as we go along, to make sure I haven't missed anything. The one couple of. Couple of points, Mr. Betts, on this, if I may. One is around the violence against women and girls response, and to reassure the honourable gentleman that older women are part of that work.
As I said earlier in my speech. But just to make that very clear point, that it's not about forgetting any women that are victims of sexual violence, it's about trying to be as inclusive as we can to offer support to victims in recovery, but also to try and prevent this sexual violence in conflict. Both my honourable friend, the honourable gentleman, raised the UN convention on the Rights of Older Persons to recognise older people and and their legacies. Can I confirm, as I have done in Pqrs and into various colleagues who've written to me in my time in this role, we are supportive of the UN Convention on Older Persons.
There are many, many existing support mechanisms for older people within the UN multilateral system. That doesn't mean to say that it shouldn't come through in some form of convention, but when that does happen and those negotiations are ongoing, I do hope I can't give a cast iron guarantee in the sense of who will be the minister. Um, but. But but to be clear, there is genuine support across HMG to ensure that we do support the work of that of that resolution in supporting older people.
Gladly.
14:41
14:41
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
Can I thank her for her intervention on timescale?This has been a matter of debate for some years. I should I should sort of warn her. She probably knows far more about it than I do. So I can't stand you and say it'll be done by X date. What I can say is that we are part of those conversations, and that's what our contribution is, is to try and make sure that as this work is brought together, that that may lead to the convention on older people, we're not stepping away from it.
We're a part of that actual work that's ongoing. I'd happily give way. Again.
We're a part of that actual work that's ongoing. I'd happily give way. Again.
14:42
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
I'm really grateful, not least because of the work done in Wales around the the rights of older people and having the commission there. Will he ensure that our government takes a real leadership role in moving that work forward, in ensuring other nations contribute and participate in that, and that we can get these rights established, because ultimately, we know that this could be really transformative for establishing a rights based system for older people across the globe.
14:42
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
Just to just to reassure her that I meet frequently with other ministers internationally, um, within, within the UN space in New York, but also in Geneva at the Human Rights Council, where these issues are discussed. And there is a willingness for, for this to succeed. I think in my in my opinion, so that that work is very much part of conversations of which we are there in the room for much of it. So just to give that reassurance, and to conclude, Mr. Betts, as a as the global population ages and as conflicts and humanitarian crises continue around the world, the number of older people affected is likely to increase.
That is why the UK is working with humanitarian partners to ensure older people are not overlooked. And. At the heart of this debate is a simple principle. No person should become invisible because of their age, and no society should overlook the dignity, rights and contributions of those who have spent a lifetime contributing to their communities. The United Kingdom will continue to champion the protection and inclusion and participation of older people in humanitarian action around the world.
That is why the UK is working with humanitarian partners to ensure older people are not overlooked. And. At the heart of this debate is a simple principle. No person should become invisible because of their age, and no society should overlook the dignity, rights and contributions of those who have spent a lifetime contributing to their communities. The United Kingdom will continue to champion the protection and inclusion and participation of older people in humanitarian action around the world.
14:43
14:43
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Thank you very much, sir. First of all, can I thank everyone for their contribution?Uh, can I thank my honourable friend, my friend, the honourable lady for York, uh, for for bringing forward and also for the work she does in the Appg for older people. She does a lot. And only when you hear these debates do you realise just how much it does do. And I thank her for that. She referred to the Conflict Shortens lives for a frailty.
The gender violence and, um, the complex needs that people have. Uh, all the people are the ones that lose out in conflict. Um, so refers to resilience, uh, to food care and support. And also, uh, to the sexual violence in Ukraine and across the world and better distribution of international aid is vital. Uh, and I thank the honourable lady for, uh. Very clearly the way forward and for all that she does. Thank you, honourable member for for Glasgow South also and intervention referred to the need to, to, uh, have the data and focus especially on, on the issue so we can know just how many people are suffering.
Honourable gentleman for Horsham thank him very much for his contribution. Um I, um do think we need to look at the international aid, but just where that money comes from is the question we have to look at. And it can't be ignored. But the main thing is the the honourable gentleman referred to humanitarian crisis. Older people suffer more, uh, challenge this government to to address the issue of international aid and also referred to that the women, uh, and young girls as well suffer disproportionately when it comes to any of these crisis.
Data is needed. Uh, the honourable gentleman, the honourable member for Fylde and his shadow minister, uh, as he always does, makes incredible contributions. It reminds us of Armenia. Sometimes we forget about places in the world, and it's good to remember. It's good to remember because it keeps our minds focused upon the subject matter that we're discussing here today. Older people were murdered because they were still there, because they were surplus to, um, uh, the enemy's requirements. Also referred to to the executions that took place in Myanmar.
Um, sometimes we need to remember that as well because across the world, in many places, uh, all those. Over 60 are tortured and then murdered. Also, and they mentioned about the pension issue about Poland and Ukraine. And I think to be fair to the minister, he mentioned that in in his response and give us, I think, a decent response in releasing that um honourable gentleman also referred to the displaced people in Sudan and Syria, uh, and who can't access healthcare. And the minister, I thank him very much for his contribution, as always.
Um, I never doubted. Uh, I say this very respectfully and sincerely to the honourable gentleman. I never doubted that he that he wouldn't respond to us, to give us encouragement. And I always give the minister my my points in advance. Uh, it's a way I do things, uh, because I have a decent response, if you don't mind, and not be attacking anybody. That's just it's just me. That's the way I am. Um, but I want to thank him very much for, for responding to the pension issue, uh, and giving us some encouragement about how that would work.
Uh, I also referred not forgetting about any victims. That's really important. Also referred to make sure we get the data and the willingness to, to succeed. I took some of his as phrases out of out of it. Uh, and he referred to the lack of data and how government are responding to ensure that they can collect that data better. Also, older people are adversely affected in conflict. And how, uh, that focus of, of medical aid of, of, of attention, of support for disabilities for, for trauma, uh, and, and something that worries me greatly when I hear, Mr.
Chairman, that's the fact that enemies, strong men, monsters, they are use their strength to, to abuse, uh, women and girls and, and, and the minister has grasped that in a way. He also referred to Northern Ireland. And I think I mean, I know he's a knowledge of Northern Ireland, but it's not it's not lost on me, uh, in this House, uh, in relation to it and referred to the peace building and, and the, uh, the. Utilization, uh, which was prominently and primarily driven by women, uh, and very often that is the case, uh, the persuasion of men.
Maybe sometimes not always. Um, to the fore is recognized very much by the minister. Can I thank him, uh, in particular for all of his, uh, answers to the questions, um, and for his commitment and the commitment of the special envoy, the honourable member for Northumberland, who does a grand job as well. And I thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh, for for your chairship of the of the of the debate today and, and to the civil servants who organize and the department civil servants who who keep the minister.
Right. Um, well done. You know, so can I thank everyone for their contributions. It's much appreciated. Today we start something and we look to help the people, those older people who are often forgotten about today. And this all, they weren't forgotten about. Thank you.
The gender violence and, um, the complex needs that people have. Uh, all the people are the ones that lose out in conflict. Um, so refers to resilience, uh, to food care and support. And also, uh, to the sexual violence in Ukraine and across the world and better distribution of international aid is vital. Uh, and I thank the honourable lady for, uh. Very clearly the way forward and for all that she does. Thank you, honourable member for for Glasgow South also and intervention referred to the need to, to, uh, have the data and focus especially on, on the issue so we can know just how many people are suffering.
Honourable gentleman for Horsham thank him very much for his contribution. Um I, um do think we need to look at the international aid, but just where that money comes from is the question we have to look at. And it can't be ignored. But the main thing is the the honourable gentleman referred to humanitarian crisis. Older people suffer more, uh, challenge this government to to address the issue of international aid and also referred to that the women, uh, and young girls as well suffer disproportionately when it comes to any of these crisis.
Data is needed. Uh, the honourable gentleman, the honourable member for Fylde and his shadow minister, uh, as he always does, makes incredible contributions. It reminds us of Armenia. Sometimes we forget about places in the world, and it's good to remember. It's good to remember because it keeps our minds focused upon the subject matter that we're discussing here today. Older people were murdered because they were still there, because they were surplus to, um, uh, the enemy's requirements. Also referred to to the executions that took place in Myanmar.
Um, sometimes we need to remember that as well because across the world, in many places, uh, all those. Over 60 are tortured and then murdered. Also, and they mentioned about the pension issue about Poland and Ukraine. And I think to be fair to the minister, he mentioned that in in his response and give us, I think, a decent response in releasing that um honourable gentleman also referred to the displaced people in Sudan and Syria, uh, and who can't access healthcare. And the minister, I thank him very much for his contribution, as always.
Um, I never doubted. Uh, I say this very respectfully and sincerely to the honourable gentleman. I never doubted that he that he wouldn't respond to us, to give us encouragement. And I always give the minister my my points in advance. Uh, it's a way I do things, uh, because I have a decent response, if you don't mind, and not be attacking anybody. That's just it's just me. That's the way I am. Um, but I want to thank him very much for, for responding to the pension issue, uh, and giving us some encouragement about how that would work.
Uh, I also referred not forgetting about any victims. That's really important. Also referred to make sure we get the data and the willingness to, to succeed. I took some of his as phrases out of out of it. Uh, and he referred to the lack of data and how government are responding to ensure that they can collect that data better. Also, older people are adversely affected in conflict. And how, uh, that focus of, of medical aid of, of, of attention, of support for disabilities for, for trauma, uh, and, and something that worries me greatly when I hear, Mr.
Chairman, that's the fact that enemies, strong men, monsters, they are use their strength to, to abuse, uh, women and girls and, and, and the minister has grasped that in a way. He also referred to Northern Ireland. And I think I mean, I know he's a knowledge of Northern Ireland, but it's not it's not lost on me, uh, in this House, uh, in relation to it and referred to the peace building and, and the, uh, the. Utilization, uh, which was prominently and primarily driven by women, uh, and very often that is the case, uh, the persuasion of men.
Maybe sometimes not always. Um, to the fore is recognized very much by the minister. Can I thank him, uh, in particular for all of his, uh, answers to the questions, um, and for his commitment and the commitment of the special envoy, the honourable member for Northumberland, who does a grand job as well. And I thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh, for for your chairship of the of the of the debate today and, and to the civil servants who organize and the department civil servants who who keep the minister.
Right. Um, well done. You know, so can I thank everyone for their contributions. It's much appreciated. Today we start something and we look to help the people, those older people who are often forgotten about today. And this all, they weren't forgotten about. Thank you.
14:49
14:59
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
Oh, dear. Just before I call John Mill, we have quite a lot of members of the public in the gallery, and it is lovely to have you. Um and you have been through the experiences and um, you know, you're affected by the topic of the debate, but it is a convention and I please encourage members to speak into the chamber and through me and not turn round to the gallery. That is not to be impolite. It is a convention of this chamber.
Please understand that John Mill, to move the motion.
Please understand that John Mill, to move the motion.
15:00
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Thank you, Mrs. Hobhouse. And it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. And I move that the House has considered support for the Lobular moonshot campaign. MPs from across the House are here today to mark the the anniversary of the death of my constituent doctor, Susan Michaelis, founder of the Lobular Moonshot project. And I would like to thank the backbench Business Committee for finding time at very short notice in the parliamentary schedule for this debate. Um, unfortunately, the short notice has prevented many who would have liked to have spoken today from joining us.
And unfortunately, that was a necessity. This today is a sad moment because Susan is no longer with us, but it's also a time to celebrate what she has achieved. Susan was a remarkable woman. She was warm but incredibly stoic. At no time was that clearer than on her last trip to Parliament in the summer of last year. Oxygen tank in tow, determined but evidently suffering, Susan stood for 22 minutes in a silent vigil outside ten Downing Street with fellow campaigners and lobular ladies around her.
We all understood Susan was in her last days or weeks, so to watch her husband, campaigners and fellow lobular ladies rallying around her, literally supporting her, was a sight to behold. In her haste to deliver her petition to number ten that day, Susan had forgotten her ID. She was distraught. All that effort would be wasted as the rules were clear. No idea. ID, no entry. But that, of course, was not Susan's way. Susan without support blagged her way past security.
Susan was never one to take no for an answer. Not long after Susan died, in fact, days. Just days before her meeting with the then Health Secretary, um, that is that is the the moment when, sadly, she lost her life. It might seem odd to say, given that I met Susan when she was already very ill with lobular cancer, that she was campaigning to prevent. But I feel that I met Susan in her prime. It was immediately clear to me that this was a person with an unparalleled commitment to her cause.
Despite her illness, Susan never looked for the sympathy vote. She was always calm and matter of fact. It was aviation safety. She flew commercial aircraft in the Australian outback, one of the. This was before contaminated cabinet ended her flying career in 1997. She spent the following decades building the evidence base on aircraft cabin air contamination, a PhD and MSC peer reviewed research, and a leading role in her home country commercial aircraft in the Australian outback. One of the one of the few female pilots to take this challenge, and she piloted the first all female crewed Qantas flight.
This was before contaminated cabin Air ended her flying career in 1997. She spent the following decades building the evidence base on aircraft cabin air contamination, a PhD and MSC peer reviewed research, and a leading role in her home country's Senate inquiry into cabin air quality. Her focus in her final years was on lobular breast cancer, and it is on this endeavour that I was pleased to support her as her local MP. Diagnosed with invasive lobular breast cancer in 2013, it was a one millimetre mark.
No lump, no pain, two mammograms and two ultrasounds told her that there was nothing to worry about. An MRI found 2.5cm surgery, then confirmed seven. That gap between what standard imaging can see and what is actually there is the heart of why lobular breast cancer needs its own research program. It behaves differently. It is missed because it's different and it is currently treated exactly the same as the most common form of the disease. Because the underlying biology has never been properly funded.
In May 2023, with her husband Tristan, she launched the Lobular Moonshot project in Horsham. She built it from nothing into a campaign with cross-party support in this House and a partnership with the Manchester Breast Centre, and a research plan costing 20 million over five years in June 2025, Susan travelled to Manchester to help launch the scientific programme. She had spent years fighting for a programme which, of course, she knew she would never benefit from herself. Nine days later, Susan died. She never received the reply from number ten and she never got her chance to make her case to the then health secretary.
And so today I will make the case again to the government on Susan's behalf. For the 22 patients diagnosed today with lobular breast cancer and also on behalf of the 463 MPs, which is, I believe, the highest number for any individual campaign who had publicly supported this campaign so far. Every day, 22 women in this country are told that they have lobular breast cancer. That's over 8000 women a year. This is not a rare disease. It is, in fact, the sixth most prevalent cancer in women.
I will indeed.
And unfortunately, that was a necessity. This today is a sad moment because Susan is no longer with us, but it's also a time to celebrate what she has achieved. Susan was a remarkable woman. She was warm but incredibly stoic. At no time was that clearer than on her last trip to Parliament in the summer of last year. Oxygen tank in tow, determined but evidently suffering, Susan stood for 22 minutes in a silent vigil outside ten Downing Street with fellow campaigners and lobular ladies around her.
We all understood Susan was in her last days or weeks, so to watch her husband, campaigners and fellow lobular ladies rallying around her, literally supporting her, was a sight to behold. In her haste to deliver her petition to number ten that day, Susan had forgotten her ID. She was distraught. All that effort would be wasted as the rules were clear. No idea. ID, no entry. But that, of course, was not Susan's way. Susan without support blagged her way past security.
Susan was never one to take no for an answer. Not long after Susan died, in fact, days. Just days before her meeting with the then Health Secretary, um, that is that is the the moment when, sadly, she lost her life. It might seem odd to say, given that I met Susan when she was already very ill with lobular cancer, that she was campaigning to prevent. But I feel that I met Susan in her prime. It was immediately clear to me that this was a person with an unparalleled commitment to her cause.
Despite her illness, Susan never looked for the sympathy vote. She was always calm and matter of fact. It was aviation safety. She flew commercial aircraft in the Australian outback, one of the. This was before contaminated cabinet ended her flying career in 1997. She spent the following decades building the evidence base on aircraft cabin air contamination, a PhD and MSC peer reviewed research, and a leading role in her home country commercial aircraft in the Australian outback. One of the one of the few female pilots to take this challenge, and she piloted the first all female crewed Qantas flight.
This was before contaminated cabin Air ended her flying career in 1997. She spent the following decades building the evidence base on aircraft cabin air contamination, a PhD and MSC peer reviewed research, and a leading role in her home country's Senate inquiry into cabin air quality. Her focus in her final years was on lobular breast cancer, and it is on this endeavour that I was pleased to support her as her local MP. Diagnosed with invasive lobular breast cancer in 2013, it was a one millimetre mark.
No lump, no pain, two mammograms and two ultrasounds told her that there was nothing to worry about. An MRI found 2.5cm surgery, then confirmed seven. That gap between what standard imaging can see and what is actually there is the heart of why lobular breast cancer needs its own research program. It behaves differently. It is missed because it's different and it is currently treated exactly the same as the most common form of the disease. Because the underlying biology has never been properly funded.
In May 2023, with her husband Tristan, she launched the Lobular Moonshot project in Horsham. She built it from nothing into a campaign with cross-party support in this House and a partnership with the Manchester Breast Centre, and a research plan costing 20 million over five years in June 2025, Susan travelled to Manchester to help launch the scientific programme. She had spent years fighting for a programme which, of course, she knew she would never benefit from herself. Nine days later, Susan died. She never received the reply from number ten and she never got her chance to make her case to the then health secretary.
And so today I will make the case again to the government on Susan's behalf. For the 22 patients diagnosed today with lobular breast cancer and also on behalf of the 463 MPs, which is, I believe, the highest number for any individual campaign who had publicly supported this campaign so far. Every day, 22 women in this country are told that they have lobular breast cancer. That's over 8000 women a year. This is not a rare disease. It is, in fact, the sixth most prevalent cancer in women.
I will indeed.
15:06
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Madam chair, first of all, can I commend the honourable gentleman for bringing this forward to subject matter, that he been very vocal on, and we all support him in coming forward. And I apologise to you and and to him and to the ladies in the in the gallery as well. I've. I might have come earlier and I have to go home and I can't, I can't be here to make a contribution. But it's not just about the women that the gentleman referred to.
We met with women in Northern Ireland who have lobular cancer with the minister, Mike Nesbitt. Some of them women I met will not have long time in this world. And I was very, very moved by their contribution. And does he feel that now is the time for the minister and her government to make sure that the small amount of money that's needed to help alleviate the the health issues for the women comes forward. And also the money is needed for research is also there as well.
If that happens, then the ladies here today and my constituents in Northern Ireland can get the help that they need.
We met with women in Northern Ireland who have lobular cancer with the minister, Mike Nesbitt. Some of them women I met will not have long time in this world. And I was very, very moved by their contribution. And does he feel that now is the time for the minister and her government to make sure that the small amount of money that's needed to help alleviate the the health issues for the women comes forward. And also the money is needed for research is also there as well.
If that happens, then the ladies here today and my constituents in Northern Ireland can get the help that they need.
15:07
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
I thank the member for his contribution, and I very much agree with him. And, um, I would also note that the honourable member for Makerfield, who is potentially to be our new prime Minister, is himself, of course, from Manchester, has visited the clinic and is already familiar with the campaign. So I am I am hopeful. Um, as I was saying, this is the sixth most prevalent cancer in women. That puts it ahead of melanoma, ovarian, brain, kidney and pancreatic pancreatic cancer combined.
Incredibly, there is still no specific treatment. Breast cancer as a whole costs this country over 3 billion a year. It takes around 11,200 lives annually, which is roughly 31 women a day. Many of these are lobular cases, and yet it receives none of the targeted treatment that drives down mortality in other forms of this disease. Every woman designed with lobular is given the same drugs, the same protocols, the same guidelines. As someone with an entirely different cancer. That's because the basic biology of Lobular has never been established, and it.
Is this gap that the moonshot project exists to close, we need 20 million over five years. So that's just 4 million a year to crack the biology of this disease. That's not speculative research. That is, that is a certain outcome. Other researchers in the UK and around the world can then take this forward to find targeted treatments, because this is a world problem and the world can find the solutions. Of course, there are many demands on government funding, and the national budget is always under pressure.
But I think you'd be pushed to find another project with such a relatively small need for such a big reward. This is a precise unfunded gap, and we already have a delivery partner in the shape of the Manchester Breast Centre ready to begin. I'd like to conclude with some words from Suzanne's husband, Tristan, who sits behind me, and it is strange that I have to speak them rather than him. But as that is the procedure of the House. So I quote from Tristan.
Now the last overseas holiday Susan and I took together was to Easter Island, one of the most remote places on earth. Like so many people, I had always imagined the island's famous stone statues, the moai looking out across the Pacific Ocean. But when we arrived, we discovered something rather beautiful. Most of them face inland. We were told that they were positioned that way because they watch over their their people rather than looking out to see whether that is history, tradition, or simply one interpretation.
It touched us both deeply before we. Left, Susan found a beautifully carved wooden replica of one of the moai. We brought it home together and today it sits in our house. Every time I look at it, I think of Susan. It reminds me that although she is no longer physically with me, her love, her courage, and everything she stood for remain with me every single day in my heart. I'd like to think that she is still watching over me, just as those remarkable statues have watched over their people for generations.
If Susan could stand in Westminster Hall today, would she not?As she would, she would. She would not ask members to remember her. She would instead ask you to remember the thousands of women diagnosed with invasive lobular breast cancer every year who still have no treatments designed specifically for their disease. And that is why this debate matters. That is why the Lobular moonshot project matters. And that is why Susan's legacy deserves not only our admiration, but our action as Susan's husband.
I know she would have been deeply humbled that members from every corner of this House have come together today to honour her life. She never sought recognition for herself. She simply wanted to leave the world a little safer, a little fairer and a little kinder than she found it. My sincere hope is that history will remember this debate not simply as a tribute to one remarkable woman, but as the day Parliament chose to transform admiration into action for future generations of women diagnosed with invasive breast lobular breast cancer, that would have been the greatest tribute we could ever have paid to Doctor Susan Michaelis.
Thank you, chair, chair.
Incredibly, there is still no specific treatment. Breast cancer as a whole costs this country over 3 billion a year. It takes around 11,200 lives annually, which is roughly 31 women a day. Many of these are lobular cases, and yet it receives none of the targeted treatment that drives down mortality in other forms of this disease. Every woman designed with lobular is given the same drugs, the same protocols, the same guidelines. As someone with an entirely different cancer. That's because the basic biology of Lobular has never been established, and it.
Is this gap that the moonshot project exists to close, we need 20 million over five years. So that's just 4 million a year to crack the biology of this disease. That's not speculative research. That is, that is a certain outcome. Other researchers in the UK and around the world can then take this forward to find targeted treatments, because this is a world problem and the world can find the solutions. Of course, there are many demands on government funding, and the national budget is always under pressure.
But I think you'd be pushed to find another project with such a relatively small need for such a big reward. This is a precise unfunded gap, and we already have a delivery partner in the shape of the Manchester Breast Centre ready to begin. I'd like to conclude with some words from Suzanne's husband, Tristan, who sits behind me, and it is strange that I have to speak them rather than him. But as that is the procedure of the House. So I quote from Tristan.
Now the last overseas holiday Susan and I took together was to Easter Island, one of the most remote places on earth. Like so many people, I had always imagined the island's famous stone statues, the moai looking out across the Pacific Ocean. But when we arrived, we discovered something rather beautiful. Most of them face inland. We were told that they were positioned that way because they watch over their their people rather than looking out to see whether that is history, tradition, or simply one interpretation.
It touched us both deeply before we. Left, Susan found a beautifully carved wooden replica of one of the moai. We brought it home together and today it sits in our house. Every time I look at it, I think of Susan. It reminds me that although she is no longer physically with me, her love, her courage, and everything she stood for remain with me every single day in my heart. I'd like to think that she is still watching over me, just as those remarkable statues have watched over their people for generations.
If Susan could stand in Westminster Hall today, would she not?As she would, she would. She would not ask members to remember her. She would instead ask you to remember the thousands of women diagnosed with invasive lobular breast cancer every year who still have no treatments designed specifically for their disease. And that is why this debate matters. That is why the Lobular moonshot project matters. And that is why Susan's legacy deserves not only our admiration, but our action as Susan's husband.
I know she would have been deeply humbled that members from every corner of this House have come together today to honour her life. She never sought recognition for herself. She simply wanted to leave the world a little safer, a little fairer and a little kinder than she found it. My sincere hope is that history will remember this debate not simply as a tribute to one remarkable woman, but as the day Parliament chose to transform admiration into action for future generations of women diagnosed with invasive breast lobular breast cancer, that would have been the greatest tribute we could ever have paid to Doctor Susan Michaelis.
Thank you, chair, chair.
15:11
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
Thank you. May I remind members that there should. Bob, if they wish to be called in this debate, I am intending to call the frontbenchers at 358. I'm currently not imposing a time limit. I'd say eight minutes at the maximum, especially if you call for intervention. The question is that this House has considered government support for the Lobular moonshot project, and I call Sam Rushworth.
15:12
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
Thank you sir. I serve under your chairmanship. Can I also thank my honourable friend, um, for Horsham for um the initiative to to lead this debate. And although she's not here today, I also want to pay tribute to the member for Maidstone, um who is a great campaigner on this issue. And I think that that really demonstrates the cross-party nature of support for what we're here to talk about today. I'd like to just begin by, um, also paying tribute to one of my constituents, Katie Swinburn.
She's a mother of three and a very popular local school teacher. And she has lobular breast cancer. I first became aware of Katie, actually through my predecessor, um, Diana Davison, who was the MP for Bishop Auckland before me. Um, and she did fantastic work supporting Katie as her constituent at the time. And, and anybody who knew my predecessor knows that when she picked up a single issue campaign, she was a formidable campaigner. And so I became aware of her.
And when I was elected, Katie asked to see me. And, uh, and I was delighted to pick up the baton and to, to, to support my constituent. In fact, this Saturday she is organising a fair and a tabletop sale in her village in Hilton to raise funds for the Lobular moonshot project. Um, through Katie, I was privileged to be ER doctor Susan Michaelis and her husband Tristan. Loraine and Susan was visiting them in their home in County Durham. Um, because through the Lobular moonshot project, I, I have observed a real sisterhood and solidarity that has emerged among those who, who are campaigning together.
It's something to, to, to be in a position where you're told that your cancer is terminal is something that I've never experienced and find difficult to imagine. But I do imagine that people facing that have have a choice about how they spend their remaining years, months and weeks on this earth. And, uh, do they, do they spend it, um, on holiday?Do they, do they look for, uh, to enjoy all of life's riches and pleasures?Well, Susan chose to spend it in the service of others campaigning for the science to be done, to develop a cure for lobular breast cancer.
Um, she founded the lobular Moonshot campaign and has been. In, I think, not just a campaigner for better cancer research funding, but also has has developed a real group of solidarity of people that that that are suffering from this type of cancer. And I was privileged also to meet Susan and her husband and to learn about the the Lobular moonshot campaign. And as we've heard already from the member from Horsham, this was not her first experience campaigning. She she had success campaigning on aviation safety, in particular, um, the jet fuel and the pollution in cabins, which is a potential cause of, of her own cancer.
The Lobular moonshot project so far has been successful in raising significant funds. Those funds have been used to develop funding proposals to develop the early work. And as we've heard, there is an opportunity to fund significant research at Manchester University. And I must declare an interest. I am a Manchester alumni myself. Um, and I was privileged to, to to meet with the campaigners and the former health secretary. Um that led to a commitment from government to issue a highlight notice to demonstrate the, the importance that the government places on this type of research, the government's approach has been, and I do respect this to, to say that, um, that whilst we all, of course want to find a cure and, and need to do the scientific research that it's important that this be through a peer reviewed process, through competitive funding rounds, because that produces the best science, but it is absolutely vital that those funding rounds do exist and that there are that funding is made available to.
To meet this particular need. And as we've heard already, the. The unique part of breast cancer is it's very difficult to discover. It often goes undetected. Um, indeed, only 28% of cases are detected in stage one, compared to 38% in non lobular. There's 8400 cases a year. And what the campaign is calling for is for the discovery science to be done. And I appreciate that the Minister today is answering on behalf of the Department for health.
But but we also need to have engagement with the Department for science, Trade and Industry on this because it. What we need to see as well is UK re bringing out bespoke funding calls that universities like Manchester can can tap into to make sure that this vital work gets done. I was privileged to meet with professor Rob Clark from Manchester and hear about the work that he's doing. Um, I'll make sure to leave time for others, but I just want to conclude by urging the minister to really pick up this issue, because we're two years on since I was elected, we're about 3 or 4 years on since I first heard about this campaign.
Um, progress has been made, but progress is too slow. And, and it's, it's important when we have this many people that are really. In situations that I, that I can't really even imagine a giving their time to campaign for something that's so important, not even necessarily for themselves, but for the generations that come after them. Uh, I just for government to listen to, to their calls and to do what we can to make sure that the correct funding calls are available so that we can, once and for all, get this research done and answer these people's, please.
She's a mother of three and a very popular local school teacher. And she has lobular breast cancer. I first became aware of Katie, actually through my predecessor, um, Diana Davison, who was the MP for Bishop Auckland before me. Um, and she did fantastic work supporting Katie as her constituent at the time. And, and anybody who knew my predecessor knows that when she picked up a single issue campaign, she was a formidable campaigner. And so I became aware of her.
And when I was elected, Katie asked to see me. And, uh, and I was delighted to pick up the baton and to, to, to support my constituent. In fact, this Saturday she is organising a fair and a tabletop sale in her village in Hilton to raise funds for the Lobular moonshot project. Um, through Katie, I was privileged to be ER doctor Susan Michaelis and her husband Tristan. Loraine and Susan was visiting them in their home in County Durham. Um, because through the Lobular moonshot project, I, I have observed a real sisterhood and solidarity that has emerged among those who, who are campaigning together.
It's something to, to, to be in a position where you're told that your cancer is terminal is something that I've never experienced and find difficult to imagine. But I do imagine that people facing that have have a choice about how they spend their remaining years, months and weeks on this earth. And, uh, do they, do they spend it, um, on holiday?Do they, do they look for, uh, to enjoy all of life's riches and pleasures?Well, Susan chose to spend it in the service of others campaigning for the science to be done, to develop a cure for lobular breast cancer.
Um, she founded the lobular Moonshot campaign and has been. In, I think, not just a campaigner for better cancer research funding, but also has has developed a real group of solidarity of people that that that are suffering from this type of cancer. And I was privileged also to meet Susan and her husband and to learn about the the Lobular moonshot campaign. And as we've heard already from the member from Horsham, this was not her first experience campaigning. She she had success campaigning on aviation safety, in particular, um, the jet fuel and the pollution in cabins, which is a potential cause of, of her own cancer.
The Lobular moonshot project so far has been successful in raising significant funds. Those funds have been used to develop funding proposals to develop the early work. And as we've heard, there is an opportunity to fund significant research at Manchester University. And I must declare an interest. I am a Manchester alumni myself. Um, and I was privileged to, to to meet with the campaigners and the former health secretary. Um that led to a commitment from government to issue a highlight notice to demonstrate the, the importance that the government places on this type of research, the government's approach has been, and I do respect this to, to say that, um, that whilst we all, of course want to find a cure and, and need to do the scientific research that it's important that this be through a peer reviewed process, through competitive funding rounds, because that produces the best science, but it is absolutely vital that those funding rounds do exist and that there are that funding is made available to.
To meet this particular need. And as we've heard already, the. The unique part of breast cancer is it's very difficult to discover. It often goes undetected. Um, indeed, only 28% of cases are detected in stage one, compared to 38% in non lobular. There's 8400 cases a year. And what the campaign is calling for is for the discovery science to be done. And I appreciate that the Minister today is answering on behalf of the Department for health.
But but we also need to have engagement with the Department for science, Trade and Industry on this because it. What we need to see as well is UK re bringing out bespoke funding calls that universities like Manchester can can tap into to make sure that this vital work gets done. I was privileged to meet with professor Rob Clark from Manchester and hear about the work that he's doing. Um, I'll make sure to leave time for others, but I just want to conclude by urging the minister to really pick up this issue, because we're two years on since I was elected, we're about 3 or 4 years on since I first heard about this campaign.
Um, progress has been made, but progress is too slow. And, and it's, it's important when we have this many people that are really. In situations that I, that I can't really even imagine a giving their time to campaign for something that's so important, not even necessarily for themselves, but for the generations that come after them. Uh, I just for government to listen to, to their calls and to do what we can to make sure that the correct funding calls are available so that we can, once and for all, get this research done and answer these people's, please.
15:18
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
It's. Pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Miss Hobhouse. And I thank the honourable member for Horsham for securing this very important debate. I also pay tribute to everyone who has campaigned tirelessly, tirelessly on this issue. When I met the Lobular Moonshot project team in April, their determination to improve outcomes for patients was unmistakable. This debate is also an opportunity to remember Doctor Susan Michaelis on the first anniversary of her passing, after being diagnosed with invasive lobular breast cancer in 2011, Susan developed her devoted.
Her final years to advancing research into this awful disease. In 2023, she founded the Lobular Moonshot Project, and in December 2024, many colleagues and I spoke in a Westminster Hall debate, echoing the project's call for greater investment in lobular breast cancer research. And I hope the minister will be able to give us some idea as to whether they listened to us those months ago and whether they're listening very much today, because. Very little appears to have changed. In invasive. Lobular breast cancer is the second most common type of breast cancer.
Between 7500 and 8000 people diagnosed every year in the UK. That's around 22 women every day. Despite accounting for around 1 in 7 breast cancer diagnoses, it remains under-researched with no treatment specifically designed for this form of the disease. As a result, patients are often treated with therapies known to be less effective for lobular tumours, increasing the risk of metastatic disease. Greater toxicity and poorer outcomes. This is not inevitable with targeted research outcomes can improve. The Lobular moonshot project is calling for £20 million over five years to fund Lobular specific research.
In the grand scheme of things, £20 million over five years is not a lot of money. That investment would deepen understanding of the disease, support the development of targeted therapies and improved and treatment for thousands of patients. Without it, progress will remain far too slow. The project estimates that 3.75 million people worldwide will be diagnosed with invasive lobular breast cancer over the next decade. That makes the need for action so very urgent. This investment also represents good value modelling by the Lobular moonshot project, suggest that preventing or delaying metastasis in even a relatively small number of patients would more than offset the proposed £20 million investment through reduced treatment costs.
I know many across the cancer community are eagerly awaiting the government's workforce plan. Can the Minister update the House on when it might be published?In closing, I urge the government to support the Lobular moonshot project and commit £20 million to improve research, diagnosis and treatment for invasive lobular breast cancer. I also once again pay tribute to Doctor Susan Michaelis without her tireless campaigning, I doubt we would be here today debating this issue or pressing for the change that so many patients and families deserve.
Thank you.
Her final years to advancing research into this awful disease. In 2023, she founded the Lobular Moonshot Project, and in December 2024, many colleagues and I spoke in a Westminster Hall debate, echoing the project's call for greater investment in lobular breast cancer research. And I hope the minister will be able to give us some idea as to whether they listened to us those months ago and whether they're listening very much today, because. Very little appears to have changed. In invasive. Lobular breast cancer is the second most common type of breast cancer.
Between 7500 and 8000 people diagnosed every year in the UK. That's around 22 women every day. Despite accounting for around 1 in 7 breast cancer diagnoses, it remains under-researched with no treatment specifically designed for this form of the disease. As a result, patients are often treated with therapies known to be less effective for lobular tumours, increasing the risk of metastatic disease. Greater toxicity and poorer outcomes. This is not inevitable with targeted research outcomes can improve. The Lobular moonshot project is calling for £20 million over five years to fund Lobular specific research.
In the grand scheme of things, £20 million over five years is not a lot of money. That investment would deepen understanding of the disease, support the development of targeted therapies and improved and treatment for thousands of patients. Without it, progress will remain far too slow. The project estimates that 3.75 million people worldwide will be diagnosed with invasive lobular breast cancer over the next decade. That makes the need for action so very urgent. This investment also represents good value modelling by the Lobular moonshot project, suggest that preventing or delaying metastasis in even a relatively small number of patients would more than offset the proposed £20 million investment through reduced treatment costs.
I know many across the cancer community are eagerly awaiting the government's workforce plan. Can the Minister update the House on when it might be published?In closing, I urge the government to support the Lobular moonshot project and commit £20 million to improve research, diagnosis and treatment for invasive lobular breast cancer. I also once again pay tribute to Doctor Susan Michaelis without her tireless campaigning, I doubt we would be here today debating this issue or pressing for the change that so many patients and families deserve.
Thank you.
15:23
15:23
15:23
Speaker 12
-
Speaker 12
You, Mr. Hobhouse, it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. Um, and I would also like to, to thank the honourable member for Horsham for bringing this hugely important debate forward today. And the the very powerful speech that was given just a few weeks ago. I stood outside Downing Street alongside women living with invasive lobular breast cancer. Their families and campaigners for the lobular moonshot projects. 22 minute silence. Those 22 minutes represented the 22 women who lose their lives to lobular breast cancer every day, and it was a deeply moving experience standing in silence with women who were living with this disease alongside those who have lost loved ones brought home.
Why today's debate really matters. They were not asking for sympathy. They were asking to be seen. They were asking for better research, earlier diagnosis and better outcomes for women diagnosed in the future. Today, I want to share the story of my constituent Trish. She is kindly given me permission to share her story because she hopes that by doing so, another woman may recognise the signs of lobular breast cancer sooner. Trish did everything we asked women to do.
Between 2014 and 2025, she attended six mammograms, six opportunities for cancer to be found, six occasions when she believed that if something was wrong, it would be detected. But none of those mammograms picked up any signs. And like many women, Trish believed cancer meant finding a lump. It wasn't a lump that led to her diagnosis. It was a shadow. After getting out of the shower one morning, she noticed a shadow underneath her breast while putting her hair up, she took a photograph and could clearly see dimpling in her skin.
Thankfully, her GP listened and referred her urgently under the two week wait pathway. I want to put a place on record. I want to put place on record. My thanks to that GP because despite there being no obvious lump, they recognised that something wasn't right at the breast clinic she underwent mammograms, ultrasounds and biopsies. Initially, she was reassured that there was no lump to feel. She was then told there was a small area of concern. The plan was for lumpectomy, a short course of radiotherapy and, as she recalls being told, she would likely be back at work in a month, she underwent an MRI and that's when everything changed.
The MRI showed that the tumour measured approximately 72mm following surgery. It was confirmed to be 75mm. Her treatment changed completely. She needed a mastectomy with immediate reconstruction, followed by 15 rounds of radiotherapy, and is currently undergoing ten years of hormone therapy. She certainly wasn't back at work after a month, but her experience raises important questions. Lobular breast cancer is the second most common type of breast cancer, yet many women have never even heard of it. Unlike the breast cancers, many of us are more familiar with, lobular breast cancer often doesn't form a distinct lump.
Instead, it grows in a strand like tumours, making it much harder to detect on mammograms and often much harder to feel during examination. That is why women with lobular breast cancer are so often diagnosed later, when tumours are much larger and treatment becomes far more extensive. For Trish, six mammograms over more than a decade failed to detect her cancer, and that is why the work of the Lobular moonshot project matters. Campaigners are not asking for special treatment. They're asking for research.
They're asking that research into lobular breast cancer reflects the scale of the challenge they are asking for earlier diagnosis, better understanding of how this disease behaves, improved imaging and more effective treatments. And above all, they're asking that women with lobular breast cancer are no longer overlooked because their cancer behaves differently. Awareness of lobular lobular breast cancer must improve. For many years, the message has quite rightly been checked for lumps. But breast cancer is not always a lump. Women also need to know about dimpling or puckering.
Changes in breast shape, thickening of the breast tissue and changes to the skin, as Trish said to me, you should know your breasts as well as you know your face. I welcome the engagement ministers have already had with campaigners and researchers, and I hope today's debate marks another step forward.
Why today's debate really matters. They were not asking for sympathy. They were asking to be seen. They were asking for better research, earlier diagnosis and better outcomes for women diagnosed in the future. Today, I want to share the story of my constituent Trish. She is kindly given me permission to share her story because she hopes that by doing so, another woman may recognise the signs of lobular breast cancer sooner. Trish did everything we asked women to do.
Between 2014 and 2025, she attended six mammograms, six opportunities for cancer to be found, six occasions when she believed that if something was wrong, it would be detected. But none of those mammograms picked up any signs. And like many women, Trish believed cancer meant finding a lump. It wasn't a lump that led to her diagnosis. It was a shadow. After getting out of the shower one morning, she noticed a shadow underneath her breast while putting her hair up, she took a photograph and could clearly see dimpling in her skin.
Thankfully, her GP listened and referred her urgently under the two week wait pathway. I want to put a place on record. I want to put place on record. My thanks to that GP because despite there being no obvious lump, they recognised that something wasn't right at the breast clinic she underwent mammograms, ultrasounds and biopsies. Initially, she was reassured that there was no lump to feel. She was then told there was a small area of concern. The plan was for lumpectomy, a short course of radiotherapy and, as she recalls being told, she would likely be back at work in a month, she underwent an MRI and that's when everything changed.
The MRI showed that the tumour measured approximately 72mm following surgery. It was confirmed to be 75mm. Her treatment changed completely. She needed a mastectomy with immediate reconstruction, followed by 15 rounds of radiotherapy, and is currently undergoing ten years of hormone therapy. She certainly wasn't back at work after a month, but her experience raises important questions. Lobular breast cancer is the second most common type of breast cancer, yet many women have never even heard of it. Unlike the breast cancers, many of us are more familiar with, lobular breast cancer often doesn't form a distinct lump.
Instead, it grows in a strand like tumours, making it much harder to detect on mammograms and often much harder to feel during examination. That is why women with lobular breast cancer are so often diagnosed later, when tumours are much larger and treatment becomes far more extensive. For Trish, six mammograms over more than a decade failed to detect her cancer, and that is why the work of the Lobular moonshot project matters. Campaigners are not asking for special treatment. They're asking for research.
They're asking that research into lobular breast cancer reflects the scale of the challenge they are asking for earlier diagnosis, better understanding of how this disease behaves, improved imaging and more effective treatments. And above all, they're asking that women with lobular breast cancer are no longer overlooked because their cancer behaves differently. Awareness of lobular lobular breast cancer must improve. For many years, the message has quite rightly been checked for lumps. But breast cancer is not always a lump. Women also need to know about dimpling or puckering.
Changes in breast shape, thickening of the breast tissue and changes to the skin, as Trish said to me, you should know your breasts as well as you know your face. I welcome the engagement ministers have already had with campaigners and researchers, and I hope today's debate marks another step forward.
15:27
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
With my honourable friend on that point. Thank you, Mrs. Hobhouse. And may I just say that my hon. Friend and other colleagues are making some very powerful points today. Um, I just wanted to really ask my hon. Friend if she's also going to come on to the important issue of looking again at medical training and education for doctors and other medical professionals, and indeed, the possible benefits of greater public awareness. And I know that the Department of Health has historically done some very important work leading on public awareness campaigns of, um, of illnesses and other issues in the health world.
And I do hope she, she may be able to highlight that as well.
And I do hope she, she may be able to highlight that as well.
15:28
Speaker 12
-
Speaker 12
I thank my hon. Friend for that. Um, Trish is actually a phenomenal campaigner. A lot like Susan actually, and she wants to, uh, work together to create that awareness campaign so that women do actually understand that there is a difference. Um, and we are looking to establish a support group for women as well who have lobular breast cancer. So that is absolutely in the works and on training. You're absolutely right. That recognition, that training, I think that forms part of the, you know, the research and understanding the detection, what it is, what causes it, but also what we need to do in the training that people in the profession need as well.
So thank you. I hope the government will continue working with researchers, clinicians and the Lobular moonshot project to improve understanding of lobular breast cancer, support further research and ensure that women receive the earliest and most accurate diagnosis possible. Because behind every statistic is someone like Trish, a woman who did everything that she was supposed to do, a woman who wants her experience to help somebody else. Next week, many of the women I stood alongside outside Downing Street will gather once again. My hope is that one day they will no longer need to.
My hope is that through better research, greater awareness and earlier diagnosis, fewer women will hear the words that Trish heard. And I hope that colleagues from across the House will continue to stand with them until that becomes a reality.
So thank you. I hope the government will continue working with researchers, clinicians and the Lobular moonshot project to improve understanding of lobular breast cancer, support further research and ensure that women receive the earliest and most accurate diagnosis possible. Because behind every statistic is someone like Trish, a woman who did everything that she was supposed to do, a woman who wants her experience to help somebody else. Next week, many of the women I stood alongside outside Downing Street will gather once again. My hope is that one day they will no longer need to.
My hope is that through better research, greater awareness and earlier diagnosis, fewer women will hear the words that Trish heard. And I hope that colleagues from across the House will continue to stand with them until that becomes a reality.
15:29
15:29
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
Thank you. Before I call Josh Newbury, um, can I. Encourage you to speak into your microphones?It's quite difficult to hear even for me, it must be even more difficult to hear the debate. If you're sitting in the gallery. And please direct your remarks into the room. I know the temptation is great to direct her to our guests. As I said before, we know you're here, we acknowledge you, but please make sure you speak up.
You speak into your microphone so everybody can hear and to speak into the room here. Thank you. And now I call Josh Newbury.
You speak into your microphone so everybody can hear and to speak into the room here. Thank you. And now I call Josh Newbury.
15:31
Speaker 14
-
Speaker 14
Thank you, Miss Hobhouse. It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today. And thank you for the reminders. Um, I would like to very sincerely thank the honourable member for Horsham for leading the effort to secure this debate and for his incredibly powerful speech. His recounting of Susan's final visit to Parliament and the words of her husband, Tristan were very moving, very moving indeed. And I believe that he has done Susan, her loved ones and the thousands of supporters of her campaign proud.
Today, I, too, would like to welcome Tristan, Susan's aunt Sally and her cousin Andrew to Parliament today. Tristan kindly shared with us the briefing he prepared for members ahead of this debate. And I know that many of us have drawn on that and absorbed that this afternoon, Susan had just one symptom, one tiny millimetre long mark on her breast. No pain, no lump, none of the warning signs that many of us have been told to look out for. But that tiny mark concealed something a lot bigger.
As we've heard, seven centimetres of invasive lobular breast cancer. There's something profoundly cruel about that. The disease was growing silently, while every reassuring scan understandably gave Susan and her family reason to believe everything was fine. As we've heard incredibly, nine days before she passed away, Susan launched the scientific programme for Lobular Moonshot project. Even while facing the unimaginable, she was looking beyond herself. She was fighting to ensure that other families might one day be spared what hers had endured.
I have no doubt that she would be immensely proud to see her family, her Member of Parliament, continuing that work in her memory today. Since being elected, 14 of my constituents have contacted me about breast cancer. 14 people who felt compelled to write to me because this disease had touched their own lives or the lives of somebody that they love. One in particular contacted me in every way she could to rightly command my attention, to make sure that I signed up to this campaign.
But if my two years in this House has taught me anything, it's that for every person who writes to us as MPs, there are hundreds more who have been affected. But for whatever reason, don't write in to us. I'd be surprised if there is anybody in this room whose life has not been shaped in some way by cancer. In my own family, we unexpectedly lost my wonderful aunt during the pandemic after her cancer was spotted too late. It reaches into every family, every community, every constituency.
I'm sure most of us know somebody whose chair at the dinner table is empty because of cancer, or someone who still sits there because it was found in time. That is the difference in early diagnosis. A cancer diagnosis is literally a race against time, and every second of delay gives cancer a head start. Um, that it really doesn't need. Our NHS can only fight with the tools that we give it. So if those tools can't see a disease or can't treat it properly, then we can't expect patients to get the outcomes that they deserve.
Invasive lobular breast cancer accounts for around 15% of all breast cancer diagnoses, yet there are still no treatments developed specifically for it, as we've heard, and 1000 people across the world are diagnosed with this disease every single day. For those people, this debate is about far more than statistics. It's about whether future patients can hear the words. We found it early rather than if only we'd got it sooner. Cancer's a race against time, and every misdiagnosis gives the disease a head start.
The Lobular moonshot project seeks, as we've heard, just £20 million over five years to better understand the biology of the disease and develop targeted treatments. It's already secured the support of hundreds of members of this House. Surely that level of cross-party support reflects a belief that patients with this horrendous disease deserve to be seen, to be understood, and to benefit from research that gives them the same hope as every other breast cancer patient. That was Doctor Susan Michaela's mission. That was her call to us.
As the honourable member for Horsham said, we have a window of opportunity to do that now, and I hope that every possible effort can be made to seize that opportunity. Thank you.
Today, I, too, would like to welcome Tristan, Susan's aunt Sally and her cousin Andrew to Parliament today. Tristan kindly shared with us the briefing he prepared for members ahead of this debate. And I know that many of us have drawn on that and absorbed that this afternoon, Susan had just one symptom, one tiny millimetre long mark on her breast. No pain, no lump, none of the warning signs that many of us have been told to look out for. But that tiny mark concealed something a lot bigger.
As we've heard, seven centimetres of invasive lobular breast cancer. There's something profoundly cruel about that. The disease was growing silently, while every reassuring scan understandably gave Susan and her family reason to believe everything was fine. As we've heard incredibly, nine days before she passed away, Susan launched the scientific programme for Lobular Moonshot project. Even while facing the unimaginable, she was looking beyond herself. She was fighting to ensure that other families might one day be spared what hers had endured.
I have no doubt that she would be immensely proud to see her family, her Member of Parliament, continuing that work in her memory today. Since being elected, 14 of my constituents have contacted me about breast cancer. 14 people who felt compelled to write to me because this disease had touched their own lives or the lives of somebody that they love. One in particular contacted me in every way she could to rightly command my attention, to make sure that I signed up to this campaign.
But if my two years in this House has taught me anything, it's that for every person who writes to us as MPs, there are hundreds more who have been affected. But for whatever reason, don't write in to us. I'd be surprised if there is anybody in this room whose life has not been shaped in some way by cancer. In my own family, we unexpectedly lost my wonderful aunt during the pandemic after her cancer was spotted too late. It reaches into every family, every community, every constituency.
I'm sure most of us know somebody whose chair at the dinner table is empty because of cancer, or someone who still sits there because it was found in time. That is the difference in early diagnosis. A cancer diagnosis is literally a race against time, and every second of delay gives cancer a head start. Um, that it really doesn't need. Our NHS can only fight with the tools that we give it. So if those tools can't see a disease or can't treat it properly, then we can't expect patients to get the outcomes that they deserve.
Invasive lobular breast cancer accounts for around 15% of all breast cancer diagnoses, yet there are still no treatments developed specifically for it, as we've heard, and 1000 people across the world are diagnosed with this disease every single day. For those people, this debate is about far more than statistics. It's about whether future patients can hear the words. We found it early rather than if only we'd got it sooner. Cancer's a race against time, and every misdiagnosis gives the disease a head start.
The Lobular moonshot project seeks, as we've heard, just £20 million over five years to better understand the biology of the disease and develop targeted treatments. It's already secured the support of hundreds of members of this House. Surely that level of cross-party support reflects a belief that patients with this horrendous disease deserve to be seen, to be understood, and to benefit from research that gives them the same hope as every other breast cancer patient. That was Doctor Susan Michaela's mission. That was her call to us.
As the honourable member for Horsham said, we have a window of opportunity to do that now, and I hope that every possible effort can be made to seize that opportunity. Thank you.
15:35
15:35
Speaker 16
-
Speaker 16
Thank you, Miss Hobhouse. It's a pleasure to serve under you today. And like others, I do want to thank the member for Horsham both for introducing the debate and for the way in which he did it. And I don't want to make a prediction. I make a prediction. Um, Miss Hobhouse, I think the remaining speakers are going to say that the support this campaign and they want to see a difference and acknowledge the gap that needs to be filled.
Uh, but I think our challenge is making that pledge in those words, something that is real, because I've been in these debates before where we all agree something has to be done, but yet we come back and we speak about it again and again and again. So perhaps this is the time, if we all carry this campaign forward to actually make it happen. So I am really very happy to.
Uh, but I think our challenge is making that pledge in those words, something that is real, because I've been in these debates before where we all agree something has to be done, but yet we come back and we speak about it again and again and again. So perhaps this is the time, if we all carry this campaign forward to actually make it happen. So I am really very happy to.
15:36
15:36
15:36
Speaker 16
-
Speaker 16
Exactly. And, you know, I was in a former life. I was an academic in Ukri does at times engage with academics to fine tune those questions. And also Ukri does provide funding to universities if needed, to bring the very best people to the UK, either temporarily or on longer term contracts to help make a difference in the UK. So these things are perhaps all part of the solution. So absolutely it is absolutely right. So I am grateful for the opportunity to support this vital debate today.
And it does shine much needed light on a disease that is still under resourced, as I have just said, and it does honor the legacy of a woman who dedicated her final years to fighting it. The late Susan Michaelis. I was not fortunate enough to meet her, but I think through the member for Horsham, excellent introduction. I do feel like I know a little bit about her and her character, so I am really, really grateful for that introduction. So lobular breast cancer, despite being the second most common form of breast cancer, has historically received a mere 1% of breast cancer research funding, Susan refused to accept that disparity, and the Lobular moonshot project is her legacy.
But it has to be more than a project. Hopefully, progress will be her real legacy, demanding better treatment for every woman who receives a lobular breast cancer diagnosis. And that is why we are all here today. All of us. I recently received an incredibly powerful letter from a leading oncologist, Doctor Michie, who is based in Edinburgh treating patients within Scotland and works closely with this community. She expressed deep frustration. Professional frustration on behalf of our patients, explicitly stating that lobular breast cancer has been neglected for too long.
So these are people who are actually meeting people day in, day out, week in, week out. And still, there is a real frustration about the lack of progress. Her letter also highlighted highlights the fact that lobular breast cancer is different disease to the more common ductal breast cancer types. As we have already heard, with an entirely unique tumour biology. Different responses to drug treatments, and a distinct and highly challenging patterns of spread in that different response to drug treatments is really important because in the absence of proper treatments, often that is what the women are faced with a drug that was not actually designed for the condition that they have yet.
Clinical trials are rarely even pre clinical trials rarely even present separate responses. Response data for Lobular cases. And today there are a grand total of zero Lobular specific clinical trials actively recruiting patients in the UK. That should shame us. Based on what we have discussed already today and the scale and the breadth of the campaign that has been run. Additionally, the incidence of lobular breast cancer is rising rapidly, climbing at nearly 3% annually. And because it does not form the typical lump, it is notoriously difficult to detect using classical imaging.
So 3% annually growth in this condition in terms of the diagnoses, I know as a government we are really keen on growth, but not not that kind of growth, I don't think. And to fix this we need to improve our preclinical understanding of how and why this disease spreads. I believe that the work I believe that the work package plan from the Lobular Moon project is precisely the kind of ambitious and collaborative plan that can help us improve patient outcomes across the board. And if people do not believe that, let us have a conversation about how it can be improved.
Very happy to give way on.
And it does shine much needed light on a disease that is still under resourced, as I have just said, and it does honor the legacy of a woman who dedicated her final years to fighting it. The late Susan Michaelis. I was not fortunate enough to meet her, but I think through the member for Horsham, excellent introduction. I do feel like I know a little bit about her and her character, so I am really, really grateful for that introduction. So lobular breast cancer, despite being the second most common form of breast cancer, has historically received a mere 1% of breast cancer research funding, Susan refused to accept that disparity, and the Lobular moonshot project is her legacy.
But it has to be more than a project. Hopefully, progress will be her real legacy, demanding better treatment for every woman who receives a lobular breast cancer diagnosis. And that is why we are all here today. All of us. I recently received an incredibly powerful letter from a leading oncologist, Doctor Michie, who is based in Edinburgh treating patients within Scotland and works closely with this community. She expressed deep frustration. Professional frustration on behalf of our patients, explicitly stating that lobular breast cancer has been neglected for too long.
So these are people who are actually meeting people day in, day out, week in, week out. And still, there is a real frustration about the lack of progress. Her letter also highlighted highlights the fact that lobular breast cancer is different disease to the more common ductal breast cancer types. As we have already heard, with an entirely unique tumour biology. Different responses to drug treatments, and a distinct and highly challenging patterns of spread in that different response to drug treatments is really important because in the absence of proper treatments, often that is what the women are faced with a drug that was not actually designed for the condition that they have yet.
Clinical trials are rarely even pre clinical trials rarely even present separate responses. Response data for Lobular cases. And today there are a grand total of zero Lobular specific clinical trials actively recruiting patients in the UK. That should shame us. Based on what we have discussed already today and the scale and the breadth of the campaign that has been run. Additionally, the incidence of lobular breast cancer is rising rapidly, climbing at nearly 3% annually. And because it does not form the typical lump, it is notoriously difficult to detect using classical imaging.
So 3% annually growth in this condition in terms of the diagnoses, I know as a government we are really keen on growth, but not not that kind of growth, I don't think. And to fix this we need to improve our preclinical understanding of how and why this disease spreads. I believe that the work I believe that the work package plan from the Lobular Moon project is precisely the kind of ambitious and collaborative plan that can help us improve patient outcomes across the board. And if people do not believe that, let us have a conversation about how it can be improved.
Very happy to give way on.
15:39
Speaker 18
-
Speaker 18
Giving way. And he speaks about the value of research. 50 years ago this year, my cousin was diagnosed with breast cancer. She had three years. She left five children under the age of ten. Yesterday I met Leslie who was diagnosed 20 years ago. And Leslie is well, still receiving treatment, but it demonstrates the value and the advances that research can make. Would he agree that it's absolutely vital that we invest in this area?
15:40
Speaker 16
-
Speaker 16
Absolutely. I mean, yesterday I met with Cancer Research UK just just outside Parliament before they came in, and they had around 100 activists there who had been touched by cancer in all shapes and forms. And I just want to make just reinforce the point I was making in that whilst the room was big and it was full of people who were full of energy, the it's just a tiny, tiny part of the footprint of cancer and its impacts across the UK. It is absolutely the tip of the iceberg stuff.
So we have to acknowledge that both the emotional impact as on individuals, their families, but also the economic impact. And we should never be ashamed of talking about that. And also the economic impact of bringing the best research to the UK, into our laboratories, into our universities, into our hospitals to work on this all all that is pushing in the right direction. So, so the government and the bioscience sector is notoriously slow moving. And what we need is to expedite work in this area.
Area. Dedicated funding commitment, a dedicated funding commitment from the government to launch the moonshot project would help do that. When we talk about housing, we talk about being builders, not blockers. Maybe we should use the same narrative and the same energy for this. On a related note, while the fight for a new funding model is critical, we cannot afford to overlook the importance of the immediate and compassionate support for people who have the condition. In my Edinburgh South West constituency, we have an incredible and incredibly important.
We are incredibly fortunate to have the House of Hope, a wonderful charity that provides a safe space for women navigating a breast cancer diagnosis and for their families, for their husbands and for their children as well. And as I understand it, they plan to start a support group which will meet for the first time on 11th August to focus specifically on lobular breast cancer. I do wish them well in that endeavor, and I am wearing my House of Hope badge today. That actually gave me three badges, Miss Hobhouse, but I went for the glittery one three different designs.
I went for the glittery one because we all need a bit of glitter in our life. Sometimes I think. I've always thought so. I've always found the House of Hope to be incredibly inspiring and hospitable place, and I would encourage any women in Edinburgh and the Lothians or further afield with a diagnosis to check out the services they provide, and I am sure that the Minister will be very welcome to visit any time as well, and I can guarantee you it will be cooler than it is in London right now.
The. So returning to Susan and her project, I believe there is a clear and fundamental shift needed in how we fund and prioritise the research we do into this condition. So I would strongly encourage the Minister to actively engage with the projects demands, meet with the campaign and agree a plan going forward about how we can address their concerns. And, as people have said already, 22 women will be diagnosed with this condition today, and we need to give them hope and we need to give their families hope.
I did check Hansard this morning and in the last Parliament, 2019 to 2024, lobular breast cancer was mentioned ten times in the current parliament, just two years in. We've mentioned it 56 times here in Parliament, and I think that what we need to do is stop talking, stop talking about in this place and actually start to get stuff done. Thank you.
So we have to acknowledge that both the emotional impact as on individuals, their families, but also the economic impact. And we should never be ashamed of talking about that. And also the economic impact of bringing the best research to the UK, into our laboratories, into our universities, into our hospitals to work on this all all that is pushing in the right direction. So, so the government and the bioscience sector is notoriously slow moving. And what we need is to expedite work in this area.
Area. Dedicated funding commitment, a dedicated funding commitment from the government to launch the moonshot project would help do that. When we talk about housing, we talk about being builders, not blockers. Maybe we should use the same narrative and the same energy for this. On a related note, while the fight for a new funding model is critical, we cannot afford to overlook the importance of the immediate and compassionate support for people who have the condition. In my Edinburgh South West constituency, we have an incredible and incredibly important.
We are incredibly fortunate to have the House of Hope, a wonderful charity that provides a safe space for women navigating a breast cancer diagnosis and for their families, for their husbands and for their children as well. And as I understand it, they plan to start a support group which will meet for the first time on 11th August to focus specifically on lobular breast cancer. I do wish them well in that endeavor, and I am wearing my House of Hope badge today. That actually gave me three badges, Miss Hobhouse, but I went for the glittery one three different designs.
I went for the glittery one because we all need a bit of glitter in our life. Sometimes I think. I've always thought so. I've always found the House of Hope to be incredibly inspiring and hospitable place, and I would encourage any women in Edinburgh and the Lothians or further afield with a diagnosis to check out the services they provide, and I am sure that the Minister will be very welcome to visit any time as well, and I can guarantee you it will be cooler than it is in London right now.
The. So returning to Susan and her project, I believe there is a clear and fundamental shift needed in how we fund and prioritise the research we do into this condition. So I would strongly encourage the Minister to actively engage with the projects demands, meet with the campaign and agree a plan going forward about how we can address their concerns. And, as people have said already, 22 women will be diagnosed with this condition today, and we need to give them hope and we need to give their families hope.
I did check Hansard this morning and in the last Parliament, 2019 to 2024, lobular breast cancer was mentioned ten times in the current parliament, just two years in. We've mentioned it 56 times here in Parliament, and I think that what we need to do is stop talking, stop talking about in this place and actually start to get stuff done. Thank you.
15:43
15:43
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
And it's an absolute pleasure to serve under your chair, Mrs. Hobhouse. And I thank my hon. Friend the member for Horsham for leading this really important debate on government support for Lobular moonshot project. I want to start by paying tribute to Doctor Susan Michaelis and her tireless campaigning on the first anniversary of her death. The debate here today celebrates a legacy that continues to inspire researchers, clinicians, patients and parliamentarians alike. Whilst this debate is about her story with with lobular breast cancer, I'd like to focus on what made her.
Susan. Is known for her campaigning on lobular breast cancer. She was so much more something her loved ones who are here today know all too well. She was an Australian who grew up in Melbourne before moving to the UK in 2003. As a child she had dreams of becoming a pilot, but due to the lack of women in the industry at the time, she settled on working in the travel industry instead. But she soon realised that she really didn't want to become a pilot, and she really did want to become a pilot and set about becoming a qualified commercial pilot.
This dream came true, and she trailblazed as the co-pilot on the first all female crewed flight for the Qantas Group. She also obtained a PhD at the University of New South Wales in Sydney in 2010. Thesis was titled Health and Flight Safety Implications from exposure to Contaminated Air in aircraft. She was a researcher who devoted her career to improving public health and aviation safety, and her contributions towards aircraft cabin air contamination remain recognised today. In 2007, Susan and her husband raised concern with the world's leading jet engine oil manufacturers about crew and passenger exposure to engine oil decomposition products.
Whilst most ignored the issue, the French company NYCO investigated and confirmed that the fuel additives affected gene expression. As a result, NYCO developed a new, less hazardous jet engine oil. NYCO 940 SE. The oil received SC approval in 2023 and the US military approval for all NATO aircraft in 2024. But her legacy undoubtedly remains the Lobular moonshot project and the change she championed, whilst knowing that she would not live to reap the benefits. Susan was diagnosed with lobular breast cancer in 2013 after a small one millimetre mark was noticed on her left breast.
She had no lumps and had experienced no pain. Two mammograms and two ultrasound scans and two ultrasound scans showed no cause for concern. An MRI scan suggested the presence of a 2.5cm area of lobular breast cancer, which was later confirmed by a biopsy. Underwent a double mastectomy and post-operative pathology revealed that the cancer actually measured seven centimetres. This was much larger than what had initially been detected, and was missed entirely by mammograms, and ultrasounds. Had Susan been given regular MRI scans in the last ten years before her diagnosis, her lobular breast cancer would have been detected much earlier.
For all cancers. Early diagnosis and effective treatment is essential to increase survival. Susan's story tragically highlights how these challenges continue to be experienced by the millions of patients living with lobular breast cancer. The current NHS imaging techniques can fail to detect the disease accurately, which often leads to diagnosis at a later and more advanced stage. Unlike other breast cancers, lobular breast cancer tends to spread out in straight lines rather than amassing to form a firm lump. A patient is more likely to have a thickened area of breast tissue as a symptom, rather than the expected lump.
This is what makes lobular breast cancer so difficult to detect during a physical examination. And when using imaging scans such as mammograms and ultrasounds. Research evidence indicates that MRIs, which can produce detailed images of inside the breast, offer improved detection and characterization of lobular breast cancer. If Susan had been given a regular MRI scan in the ten years prior to her diagnosis, there is a very real chance that her cancer would have been detected sooner. This would have reduced the risk of it metastasizing and ultimately claiming her life.
Also only received genetic breast cancer treatment, as there is currently no specialised treatment for lobular breast cancer. Susan underwent eight systemic treatments over the span of 12 years. This led to the lobular breast cancer spreading to her spine. In 2021. A pet CT scan was enabled to detect the disease progression, but once again, this was detected on an MRI scan, something that's not available on the NHS. Lobular breast cancer accounts for 1 in 7 or 15% of all new breast cancer diagnoses.
It's the second most common subtype of breast cancer. There are approximately 8400 lobular breast cancer diagnoses in the UK each year. This amounts to 22 people being diagnosed every single day. More women are impacted by lobular breast cancer than cancers of the kidney, brain, pancreas, liver or ovaries. The impact of any cancer for both the patient and their loved ones is always devastating. And lobular breast cancer is no exception. We must better our understanding of this disease to improve treatment and outcomes for all those affected.
It is unacceptable that this cancer has no specific treatments and is treated the same way as the more common types of invasive cancer. Lobular moonshot project created in May 2023 in Horsham by Susan alongside her husband, is striving to change this. The campaign is asking for the government to invest £20 million over five years to understand the biology of the disease, to enable targeted treatments. I, alongside all my Liberal Democrat colleagues, wholeheartedly support and will continue to support this very important project. The Liberal Democrats were the first major party to fully endorse this campaign.
Sir Ed Davey has the member for Kingston and Surbiton has written to both the Prime Minister and former Health Secretary on Susan's behalf and our Chief Whip. The honourable member for North East Fife has repeatedly raised this issue in the chamber. Support of the moonshot project has grown to 465 members of Parliament, making it the most widely supported health campaign in Parliament. On the 15th of July 2025, the then Health Secretary, the member for Ilford North, stated that he had instructed his chief scientific adviser to plan a path forward to understand the biology behind this cancer, to make a difference to those affected.
But one year in one year and with a new health secretary, this research project has still not got the green light. We can't allow this to fall through the cracks. So I urge the minister and all the members here today, regardless of their party, to continue to advocate on this issue. Alongside support. The work of the moonshot project. The Liberal Democrats are clear cancer must be a top priority for any government, and the UK should be a global leader in cancer research and outcomes.
The Liberal Democrats would introduce a guarantee that 100% of patients will be able to start treatment within 62 days from urgent referral. The Liberal Democrats would also recruit more cancer nurses, so that every patient has a dedicated specialist supporting them throughout their treatment. To end, I once again want to honor the legacy of Doctor Susan Michaelis and her Lobular moonshot project. The contributions made here today show the continuing impact of her legacy that inspires me and everyone in the room and beyond. I once again ask the minister to play his part in ensuring Susan's legacy continues for her and all those who have been and continue to be impacted by lobular breast cancer.
I ask him to find the £20 million to fund the research so more people survive from lobular breast cancer. Will he commit to this today?
Susan. Is known for her campaigning on lobular breast cancer. She was so much more something her loved ones who are here today know all too well. She was an Australian who grew up in Melbourne before moving to the UK in 2003. As a child she had dreams of becoming a pilot, but due to the lack of women in the industry at the time, she settled on working in the travel industry instead. But she soon realised that she really didn't want to become a pilot, and she really did want to become a pilot and set about becoming a qualified commercial pilot.
This dream came true, and she trailblazed as the co-pilot on the first all female crewed flight for the Qantas Group. She also obtained a PhD at the University of New South Wales in Sydney in 2010. Thesis was titled Health and Flight Safety Implications from exposure to Contaminated Air in aircraft. She was a researcher who devoted her career to improving public health and aviation safety, and her contributions towards aircraft cabin air contamination remain recognised today. In 2007, Susan and her husband raised concern with the world's leading jet engine oil manufacturers about crew and passenger exposure to engine oil decomposition products.
Whilst most ignored the issue, the French company NYCO investigated and confirmed that the fuel additives affected gene expression. As a result, NYCO developed a new, less hazardous jet engine oil. NYCO 940 SE. The oil received SC approval in 2023 and the US military approval for all NATO aircraft in 2024. But her legacy undoubtedly remains the Lobular moonshot project and the change she championed, whilst knowing that she would not live to reap the benefits. Susan was diagnosed with lobular breast cancer in 2013 after a small one millimetre mark was noticed on her left breast.
She had no lumps and had experienced no pain. Two mammograms and two ultrasound scans and two ultrasound scans showed no cause for concern. An MRI scan suggested the presence of a 2.5cm area of lobular breast cancer, which was later confirmed by a biopsy. Underwent a double mastectomy and post-operative pathology revealed that the cancer actually measured seven centimetres. This was much larger than what had initially been detected, and was missed entirely by mammograms, and ultrasounds. Had Susan been given regular MRI scans in the last ten years before her diagnosis, her lobular breast cancer would have been detected much earlier.
For all cancers. Early diagnosis and effective treatment is essential to increase survival. Susan's story tragically highlights how these challenges continue to be experienced by the millions of patients living with lobular breast cancer. The current NHS imaging techniques can fail to detect the disease accurately, which often leads to diagnosis at a later and more advanced stage. Unlike other breast cancers, lobular breast cancer tends to spread out in straight lines rather than amassing to form a firm lump. A patient is more likely to have a thickened area of breast tissue as a symptom, rather than the expected lump.
This is what makes lobular breast cancer so difficult to detect during a physical examination. And when using imaging scans such as mammograms and ultrasounds. Research evidence indicates that MRIs, which can produce detailed images of inside the breast, offer improved detection and characterization of lobular breast cancer. If Susan had been given a regular MRI scan in the ten years prior to her diagnosis, there is a very real chance that her cancer would have been detected sooner. This would have reduced the risk of it metastasizing and ultimately claiming her life.
Also only received genetic breast cancer treatment, as there is currently no specialised treatment for lobular breast cancer. Susan underwent eight systemic treatments over the span of 12 years. This led to the lobular breast cancer spreading to her spine. In 2021. A pet CT scan was enabled to detect the disease progression, but once again, this was detected on an MRI scan, something that's not available on the NHS. Lobular breast cancer accounts for 1 in 7 or 15% of all new breast cancer diagnoses.
It's the second most common subtype of breast cancer. There are approximately 8400 lobular breast cancer diagnoses in the UK each year. This amounts to 22 people being diagnosed every single day. More women are impacted by lobular breast cancer than cancers of the kidney, brain, pancreas, liver or ovaries. The impact of any cancer for both the patient and their loved ones is always devastating. And lobular breast cancer is no exception. We must better our understanding of this disease to improve treatment and outcomes for all those affected.
It is unacceptable that this cancer has no specific treatments and is treated the same way as the more common types of invasive cancer. Lobular moonshot project created in May 2023 in Horsham by Susan alongside her husband, is striving to change this. The campaign is asking for the government to invest £20 million over five years to understand the biology of the disease, to enable targeted treatments. I, alongside all my Liberal Democrat colleagues, wholeheartedly support and will continue to support this very important project. The Liberal Democrats were the first major party to fully endorse this campaign.
Sir Ed Davey has the member for Kingston and Surbiton has written to both the Prime Minister and former Health Secretary on Susan's behalf and our Chief Whip. The honourable member for North East Fife has repeatedly raised this issue in the chamber. Support of the moonshot project has grown to 465 members of Parliament, making it the most widely supported health campaign in Parliament. On the 15th of July 2025, the then Health Secretary, the member for Ilford North, stated that he had instructed his chief scientific adviser to plan a path forward to understand the biology behind this cancer, to make a difference to those affected.
But one year in one year and with a new health secretary, this research project has still not got the green light. We can't allow this to fall through the cracks. So I urge the minister and all the members here today, regardless of their party, to continue to advocate on this issue. Alongside support. The work of the moonshot project. The Liberal Democrats are clear cancer must be a top priority for any government, and the UK should be a global leader in cancer research and outcomes.
The Liberal Democrats would introduce a guarantee that 100% of patients will be able to start treatment within 62 days from urgent referral. The Liberal Democrats would also recruit more cancer nurses, so that every patient has a dedicated specialist supporting them throughout their treatment. To end, I once again want to honor the legacy of Doctor Susan Michaelis and her Lobular moonshot project. The contributions made here today show the continuing impact of her legacy that inspires me and everyone in the room and beyond. I once again ask the minister to play his part in ensuring Susan's legacy continues for her and all those who have been and continue to be impacted by lobular breast cancer.
I ask him to find the £20 million to fund the research so more people survive from lobular breast cancer. Will he commit to this today?
15:50
15:50
15:50
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
Thank you very much, Mrs. Hobhouse. And it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today. And I'm grateful to the honourable member for Horsham for securing today's debate. And to the members from across the House who have given their voice to this campaign over a number of years, and it is entirely right that Parliament should pause today to consider not just the science, not only the policy, not only the funding, but the human reality that sits behind all three of those. Because behind the words lobular breast cancer are women who knew something was wrong, but the system just couldn't prove it.
And that is the point at the heart of today's debate. This is not a call for special treatment. It's not a demand to place one cancer above another. It is a recognition that different cancers behave differently, present differently, and may require different approaches. If we're serious about improving outcomes. And so today we are also remembering Doctor Susan Michaelis and many people in public life are described as courageous. Mrs. Hobhouse, in Susan's case, that that word feels insufficient.
She was, as we've heard, a commercial pilot. She was a researcher, a campaigner, a wife, and a woman whose instinct, when faced with injustice or uncertainty, was not to turn away from it, but to investigate it. She had already devoted much of her professional life to public safety, particularly in the aviation sector. We've heard about how she challenged assumptions, she gathered evidence and she pursued truth in an area where the consequences mattered for passengers, crews and the wider public. And then, of course, in 2013, she had her devastating diagnosis of invasive lobular breast cancer.
And as I understand, and as we've heard today, her symptoms were not dramatic. It was a tiny mark on her breast. And yet, after two mammograms and two ultrasounds failed to identify the disease, it was ultimately an MRI scan that did. And we've heard how that revealed what had been appeared to be a relatively small. Lesion of about an inch was later confirmed to be over seven centimeters. And that single account tells us why this debate continues to matter.
It shows the particular challenge of a cancer that can be harder to detect through standard imaging. And what is remarkable is that Susan didn't live her final years in retreat from the world. She continued working. She continued researching. She continued campaigning. And as we've heard, nine days before her death, she travelled to Manchester to help launch the scientific programme for the Lobular moonshot project, knowing full well that any breakthrough would come too late for her. And I think that is an extraordinary act of generosity.
It is also a challenge to all of us in this place, and it's a challenge because if someone is living with advanced cancer and can spend her final final days and her final strength asking for progress to others, then surely it is the responsibility of us and government to find the clarity and the urgency to respond to that. As we've heard, lobular breast cancer is not, in fact, rare. It's the second most common type of breast cancer, accounting for around 15% of cases. Yet despite that, it remains too often hidden in plain sight.
I will give way.
And that is the point at the heart of today's debate. This is not a call for special treatment. It's not a demand to place one cancer above another. It is a recognition that different cancers behave differently, present differently, and may require different approaches. If we're serious about improving outcomes. And so today we are also remembering Doctor Susan Michaelis and many people in public life are described as courageous. Mrs. Hobhouse, in Susan's case, that that word feels insufficient.
She was, as we've heard, a commercial pilot. She was a researcher, a campaigner, a wife, and a woman whose instinct, when faced with injustice or uncertainty, was not to turn away from it, but to investigate it. She had already devoted much of her professional life to public safety, particularly in the aviation sector. We've heard about how she challenged assumptions, she gathered evidence and she pursued truth in an area where the consequences mattered for passengers, crews and the wider public. And then, of course, in 2013, she had her devastating diagnosis of invasive lobular breast cancer.
And as I understand, and as we've heard today, her symptoms were not dramatic. It was a tiny mark on her breast. And yet, after two mammograms and two ultrasounds failed to identify the disease, it was ultimately an MRI scan that did. And we've heard how that revealed what had been appeared to be a relatively small. Lesion of about an inch was later confirmed to be over seven centimeters. And that single account tells us why this debate continues to matter.
It shows the particular challenge of a cancer that can be harder to detect through standard imaging. And what is remarkable is that Susan didn't live her final years in retreat from the world. She continued working. She continued researching. She continued campaigning. And as we've heard, nine days before her death, she travelled to Manchester to help launch the scientific programme for the Lobular moonshot project, knowing full well that any breakthrough would come too late for her. And I think that is an extraordinary act of generosity.
It is also a challenge to all of us in this place, and it's a challenge because if someone is living with advanced cancer and can spend her final final days and her final strength asking for progress to others, then surely it is the responsibility of us and government to find the clarity and the urgency to respond to that. As we've heard, lobular breast cancer is not, in fact, rare. It's the second most common type of breast cancer, accounting for around 15% of cases. Yet despite that, it remains too often hidden in plain sight.
I will give way.
15:53
Speaker 18
-
Speaker 18
I thank the shadow Minister for giving way. I think he agrees with me that this is not a party political issue. This is something which the whole House can agree on. But in 2022, the Scottish Government began a process of improving its imaging kit with the introduction of 3D mammography, which is a major step forward. Two months ago, the Scottish Parliament lodged a motion supporting the moonshot project and called for this £20 million to be allocated. Would he agree with me that the breadth of support for this campaign, including over 440 MPs who now support it, including myself, is now irresistible and the Minister should should award this funding.
15:54
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
I'm very grateful, grateful to the honourable gentleman for his intervention. He is right. There is a collective. Moment that we must do more on this issue, and that starts with getting the research right, because without the research, we don't know how to plan for the treatments of the future. And I'll move on to the points. But he's also entirely right. This is not a party political issue. This is an issue that affects all of us and all of our constituents.
And we've got to work with a sense of urgency around it. As we've heard, the Lobular Breast Cancer Moonshot project is looking for £20 million over five years to advance that understanding of invasive lobular breast cancer to support better detection, better treatment, and better surveillance. Now, we can't dispute that is a significant sum, but we have to look at it in the context of national health spending. And in that context of what cancer costs, the cost to families, the costs to patients, and the cost to the NHS when it's detected late or it's treated inadequately.
Um, and we have to bear those factors in mind. We should also be clear about what research funding means in practice. It doesn't mean a guarantee of easy answers. Science doesn't work like that, but it does mean giving our best minds the chance to ask the right questions. It means building the evidence base. It means moving beyond a generic understanding of breast cancer and towards a more precise understanding of this specific disease. And that's the direction of travel that we have seen over a number of years in modern healthcare.
We've seen it when it comes to genomics. We've seen it in targeted therapies. We see it in the increasing recognition that treatment must be shaped by the biology of the disease and the needs of the patient, and there is no reason that lobular breast cancer should be left behind in that progress. There has, of course, been movement, and I think it's right to acknowledge that the NIH has issued a highlight notice encouraging applications for research into lobular breast cancer. The government has published its own national cancer plan.
The health bill speaks of research duties and innovation. And those are, are, are by no means meaningless, but they are not yet enough. Um, and that is why today's debate must be focused upon delivery. So I ask the minister, will the government set out a timeline to fund the Lobular Breast Cancer Moonshot project?If the answer is yes, um, then campaigners deserve to know how and through what mechanism that will happen. If the answer is no, then they deserve an honest explanation.
Is that a financial barrier?Is it a scientific one?Is it procedural, and is the government waiting for further proposals or further reviews or further assessments?Because the people who have campaigned with such dignity on this issue should not be left trying to decode in silence?I'd also ask the minister to address the issue of guidance. Lobular breast cancer is only referred to in limited form in existing national breast cancer guidance, and campaigners have called for Nice to review whether the guidance properly reflects this disease.
That guidance, of course, shapes clinical practice. It influenced what clinicians look for, what tests are considered and how treatment is approached. If the evidence is not yet strong enough to support separate recommendations, that should strengthen the case for targeted research, not weaken it. We cannot use the absence of evidence as a reason not to gather it. That would be a circular argument. And the patients who are affected by this disease deserve much better. There is also a wider lesson here about women's health.
Too often, women's symptoms have been dismissed as vague, complex, difficult to categorise. Too often, women have had to become their own advocates at the very moment that they are frightened, unwell and least able to fight, and one of the duties of a good health system is to reduce the burden on the patient, to prove that they are worth listening to. Susan Michaelis understood that deeply, and as we've heard um, earlier. In this debate on the 24th of June of last year, whilst on oxygen and clearly in pain, she stood outside Downing Street as part of that silent vigil with 22 people um, representing those 22 people diagnosed every day with lobular breast cancer in the United Kingdom.
And she delivered a letter asking for help. And two weeks later, she died wearing her lobular moonshot project t shirt. And I think that is an image that should stay with all of us today, not because policies should be made on emotion alone. Clearly they shouldn't. Policy has to be evidence based, financially responsible and clinically sound. But nor should policy be stripped of a moral seriousness. Evidence tells us what may work. Compassion reminds us why we keep working.
Responsibility requires us to bring those two factors together. The last government made investment in cancer research, including support for the Institute of Cancer Research and the Royal Marsden Biomedical Research Centre, along with wider work relevant to lobular breast cancer and in opposition. We have continued to press the government on the moonshot project, including through the Shadow health team and other colleagues, but this should not, as we have discussed, become a party political contest. Cancer doesn't observe party lines, and neither should our determination to improve the outcomes for patients.
The test for government is actually a relatively simple one. Can it turn sympathy into a plan?Can it give campaigners a clear route forward?Can it match the scale of the problem with a response that is specific, funded and time bound?Because those um. Because what those affected by lobular breast cancer need is not another expression of admiration for their bravery and courage. They need progress. They need a system that sees their cancer sooner. They need treatments shaped by its biology.
They need surveillance that reflects the risk of recurrence and spread. They need guidance that recognises the particular character of the disease, and they need research funded at a level that gives discovery a fair chance. Susan Michaelis gave the final chapter of her life to that cause. Um, she did so not for herself, but for women who she would never meet and families she would never know. And that is a legacy. Legacy worthy of more than a mere tribute.
It's worthy of action. So I hope the minister will leave this debate not only having listened carefully, but prepared to act decisively and and in doing so, the government should not only meet the campaigners, but set out the remaining barriers, publish a route to a decision and make clear whether it will fund the moonshot project. Doctor Susan Michaelis spent her life making hidden risks visible. The task before us now is to ensure that lobular breast cancer is hidden no longer.
And we've got to work with a sense of urgency around it. As we've heard, the Lobular Breast Cancer Moonshot project is looking for £20 million over five years to advance that understanding of invasive lobular breast cancer to support better detection, better treatment, and better surveillance. Now, we can't dispute that is a significant sum, but we have to look at it in the context of national health spending. And in that context of what cancer costs, the cost to families, the costs to patients, and the cost to the NHS when it's detected late or it's treated inadequately.
Um, and we have to bear those factors in mind. We should also be clear about what research funding means in practice. It doesn't mean a guarantee of easy answers. Science doesn't work like that, but it does mean giving our best minds the chance to ask the right questions. It means building the evidence base. It means moving beyond a generic understanding of breast cancer and towards a more precise understanding of this specific disease. And that's the direction of travel that we have seen over a number of years in modern healthcare.
We've seen it when it comes to genomics. We've seen it in targeted therapies. We see it in the increasing recognition that treatment must be shaped by the biology of the disease and the needs of the patient, and there is no reason that lobular breast cancer should be left behind in that progress. There has, of course, been movement, and I think it's right to acknowledge that the NIH has issued a highlight notice encouraging applications for research into lobular breast cancer. The government has published its own national cancer plan.
The health bill speaks of research duties and innovation. And those are, are, are by no means meaningless, but they are not yet enough. Um, and that is why today's debate must be focused upon delivery. So I ask the minister, will the government set out a timeline to fund the Lobular Breast Cancer Moonshot project?If the answer is yes, um, then campaigners deserve to know how and through what mechanism that will happen. If the answer is no, then they deserve an honest explanation.
Is that a financial barrier?Is it a scientific one?Is it procedural, and is the government waiting for further proposals or further reviews or further assessments?Because the people who have campaigned with such dignity on this issue should not be left trying to decode in silence?I'd also ask the minister to address the issue of guidance. Lobular breast cancer is only referred to in limited form in existing national breast cancer guidance, and campaigners have called for Nice to review whether the guidance properly reflects this disease.
That guidance, of course, shapes clinical practice. It influenced what clinicians look for, what tests are considered and how treatment is approached. If the evidence is not yet strong enough to support separate recommendations, that should strengthen the case for targeted research, not weaken it. We cannot use the absence of evidence as a reason not to gather it. That would be a circular argument. And the patients who are affected by this disease deserve much better. There is also a wider lesson here about women's health.
Too often, women's symptoms have been dismissed as vague, complex, difficult to categorise. Too often, women have had to become their own advocates at the very moment that they are frightened, unwell and least able to fight, and one of the duties of a good health system is to reduce the burden on the patient, to prove that they are worth listening to. Susan Michaelis understood that deeply, and as we've heard um, earlier. In this debate on the 24th of June of last year, whilst on oxygen and clearly in pain, she stood outside Downing Street as part of that silent vigil with 22 people um, representing those 22 people diagnosed every day with lobular breast cancer in the United Kingdom.
And she delivered a letter asking for help. And two weeks later, she died wearing her lobular moonshot project t shirt. And I think that is an image that should stay with all of us today, not because policies should be made on emotion alone. Clearly they shouldn't. Policy has to be evidence based, financially responsible and clinically sound. But nor should policy be stripped of a moral seriousness. Evidence tells us what may work. Compassion reminds us why we keep working.
Responsibility requires us to bring those two factors together. The last government made investment in cancer research, including support for the Institute of Cancer Research and the Royal Marsden Biomedical Research Centre, along with wider work relevant to lobular breast cancer and in opposition. We have continued to press the government on the moonshot project, including through the Shadow health team and other colleagues, but this should not, as we have discussed, become a party political contest. Cancer doesn't observe party lines, and neither should our determination to improve the outcomes for patients.
The test for government is actually a relatively simple one. Can it turn sympathy into a plan?Can it give campaigners a clear route forward?Can it match the scale of the problem with a response that is specific, funded and time bound?Because those um. Because what those affected by lobular breast cancer need is not another expression of admiration for their bravery and courage. They need progress. They need a system that sees their cancer sooner. They need treatments shaped by its biology.
They need surveillance that reflects the risk of recurrence and spread. They need guidance that recognises the particular character of the disease, and they need research funded at a level that gives discovery a fair chance. Susan Michaelis gave the final chapter of her life to that cause. Um, she did so not for herself, but for women who she would never meet and families she would never know. And that is a legacy. Legacy worthy of more than a mere tribute.
It's worthy of action. So I hope the minister will leave this debate not only having listened carefully, but prepared to act decisively and and in doing so, the government should not only meet the campaigners, but set out the remaining barriers, publish a route to a decision and make clear whether it will fund the moonshot project. Doctor Susan Michaelis spent her life making hidden risks visible. The task before us now is to ensure that lobular breast cancer is hidden no longer.
16:02
16:02
Speaker 20
-
Speaker 20
Thank you very much indeed, Mrs. Hobhouse, it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. And I would also like to thank the honourable member for Horsham for raising this vitally important debate, and I'd like to thank the honourable member for Maidstone and Malling for her campaigning on this topic following her own diagnosis of lobular breast cancer, and I'd like to add my tribute to Doctor Susan Michaelis, as today marks one year since she passed away from lobular breast cancer. As a founder of the Lobular Moonshot project, she tirelessly campaigned on behalf of women diagnosed with lobular breast cancer and raised awareness for the condition.
I'd also like to pay tribute to members of the Lobular moonshot project, including Susan's husband, Tristan Loraine, for picking up the mantle and continuing the important work of the project and carrying Susan's torch forward. I'd also like to recognise the number of charities who carry out important work in this area, such as Lobular Breast Cancer, UK, Breast Cancer Now and Cancer Research UK and all the honourable members and right Honourable members who continue to provide their support, many of whom we have heard from today. Lobular breast cancer accounts for 15% of breast cancer cases.
However, as we have heard, this form of cancer sadly goes undetected in too many women and we are determined to transform diagnosis and outcomes for patients. Earlier this year, the Minister for Public Health and Prevention, my hon. Friend the member for Washington and Gateshead South, who is the lead minister on this issue. I'm standing in for her today, and Lord Vallance, the Minister for science, innovation, Research and Nuclear, met at De CET, met with representatives of the Lobular moonshot project alongside government research funders.
They discussed the Lobular moonshots work. Listen to the experiences of lobular breast cancer from those attending, and discuss how to advance research in this vital area. Following this meeting last month, Lord Vallance hosted a scientific roundtable which brought together a range of researchers, clinicians and industry representatives to identify opportunities to advance research and innovation. At this meeting, attendees agreed that one of the next steps should be to encourage collaborative research and funding applications across multiple existing schemes, including for basic discovery science. I would like to emphasise that government research funders stand ready to support this work as it progresses.
We acknowledge and share the Lobular Moonshot Project's ambition for researchers to take a collaborative and interdisciplinary approach to addressing the unique challenges of lobular breast cancer government. Responsibility for delivering cancer research is shared between the Department for Health and Social Care, with research delivered by the National Institute for Health and Care Research, the niHr and the Department for science, Innovation and Technology, as it's known, with research delivered via UK Research and Innovation UK re. The Medical Research Council primarily supports the discovery sciences and fundamental biological research, which is the focus of the Lobular moonshot campaign.
Ukri through MRC have emphasised their commitment to support interdisciplinary team based research across their funding schemes and highlighted support for collaborative activities to provide a platform on which to build a portfolio of research in this important area. Research is complementary to the Mrc's focus, supporting the translation of discovery science into patient benefit through the MRC and niHr. We are already funding research into lobular breast cancer. For example, a breast cancer screening study is investigating whether a new, faster MRI scan could detect breast cancers.
Earlier, the fast MRI is a new type of scan that aims to detect cancers, including lobular breast cancer, that may not be picked up routinely by mammograms. During a first screening visit. This £1.36 million study is jointly funded by the MRC and the niHr. Furthermore, with a total investment of £32 million, the Institute for Cancer Research and Royal Marsden, niHr Biomedical Research Centre support lobular breast cancer by combining translational research, precision diagnostics and targeted clinical trials to develop and test tailored treatments. There are promising discoveries being made, such as scientists at the Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre at the Institute of Cancer Research, have recently discovered a drug currently being tested in clinical trials for a rare blood cancer that could also be used to treat lobular breast cancer.
Researchers now hope to progress the drug to clinical trials for lobular breast cancer more widely. We are supporting world leading research and development to enable the prevention of cancer and improve diagnosis, treatment and care for people affected by the conditions. Cancer is a major area of niHr spending at £141.6 million in 2425, reflecting its high priority. This is alongside UK research and innovation. The Uccri investing £198 million in cancer research in the same year. We are investing in the best Science, which explores lobular breast cancer both in isolation and in conjunction with other cancers.
To maximise on the the opportunity to share learning and identify possible breakthroughs. Historically, the breast cancer research community has categorized the field around signalling pathway and molecular presentation on tumours. This means rather than naming a particular cancer subtype, grants within the MRC portfolio, focus on the on understanding of molecular mechanisms common to both lobular breast cancer and invasive breast cancer. We know that more research is needed. That is why both the MRC and niHr are committed to continuing to support the development of high quality fundable research proposals.
There are a range of existing opportunities across funders that support this developing portfolio, the niHr is actively encouraging high quality, ambitious research proposals on lobular breast cancer, having launched a highlight notice in late 2025 to signal to researchers our interest in funding research into this area.
I'd also like to pay tribute to members of the Lobular moonshot project, including Susan's husband, Tristan Loraine, for picking up the mantle and continuing the important work of the project and carrying Susan's torch forward. I'd also like to recognise the number of charities who carry out important work in this area, such as Lobular Breast Cancer, UK, Breast Cancer Now and Cancer Research UK and all the honourable members and right Honourable members who continue to provide their support, many of whom we have heard from today. Lobular breast cancer accounts for 15% of breast cancer cases.
However, as we have heard, this form of cancer sadly goes undetected in too many women and we are determined to transform diagnosis and outcomes for patients. Earlier this year, the Minister for Public Health and Prevention, my hon. Friend the member for Washington and Gateshead South, who is the lead minister on this issue. I'm standing in for her today, and Lord Vallance, the Minister for science, innovation, Research and Nuclear, met at De CET, met with representatives of the Lobular moonshot project alongside government research funders.
They discussed the Lobular moonshots work. Listen to the experiences of lobular breast cancer from those attending, and discuss how to advance research in this vital area. Following this meeting last month, Lord Vallance hosted a scientific roundtable which brought together a range of researchers, clinicians and industry representatives to identify opportunities to advance research and innovation. At this meeting, attendees agreed that one of the next steps should be to encourage collaborative research and funding applications across multiple existing schemes, including for basic discovery science. I would like to emphasise that government research funders stand ready to support this work as it progresses.
We acknowledge and share the Lobular Moonshot Project's ambition for researchers to take a collaborative and interdisciplinary approach to addressing the unique challenges of lobular breast cancer government. Responsibility for delivering cancer research is shared between the Department for Health and Social Care, with research delivered by the National Institute for Health and Care Research, the niHr and the Department for science, Innovation and Technology, as it's known, with research delivered via UK Research and Innovation UK re. The Medical Research Council primarily supports the discovery sciences and fundamental biological research, which is the focus of the Lobular moonshot campaign.
Ukri through MRC have emphasised their commitment to support interdisciplinary team based research across their funding schemes and highlighted support for collaborative activities to provide a platform on which to build a portfolio of research in this important area. Research is complementary to the Mrc's focus, supporting the translation of discovery science into patient benefit through the MRC and niHr. We are already funding research into lobular breast cancer. For example, a breast cancer screening study is investigating whether a new, faster MRI scan could detect breast cancers.
Earlier, the fast MRI is a new type of scan that aims to detect cancers, including lobular breast cancer, that may not be picked up routinely by mammograms. During a first screening visit. This £1.36 million study is jointly funded by the MRC and the niHr. Furthermore, with a total investment of £32 million, the Institute for Cancer Research and Royal Marsden, niHr Biomedical Research Centre support lobular breast cancer by combining translational research, precision diagnostics and targeted clinical trials to develop and test tailored treatments. There are promising discoveries being made, such as scientists at the Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre at the Institute of Cancer Research, have recently discovered a drug currently being tested in clinical trials for a rare blood cancer that could also be used to treat lobular breast cancer.
Researchers now hope to progress the drug to clinical trials for lobular breast cancer more widely. We are supporting world leading research and development to enable the prevention of cancer and improve diagnosis, treatment and care for people affected by the conditions. Cancer is a major area of niHr spending at £141.6 million in 2425, reflecting its high priority. This is alongside UK research and innovation. The Uccri investing £198 million in cancer research in the same year. We are investing in the best Science, which explores lobular breast cancer both in isolation and in conjunction with other cancers.
To maximise on the the opportunity to share learning and identify possible breakthroughs. Historically, the breast cancer research community has categorized the field around signalling pathway and molecular presentation on tumours. This means rather than naming a particular cancer subtype, grants within the MRC portfolio, focus on the on understanding of molecular mechanisms common to both lobular breast cancer and invasive breast cancer. We know that more research is needed. That is why both the MRC and niHr are committed to continuing to support the development of high quality fundable research proposals.
There are a range of existing opportunities across funders that support this developing portfolio, the niHr is actively encouraging high quality, ambitious research proposals on lobular breast cancer, having launched a highlight notice in late 2025 to signal to researchers our interest in funding research into this area.
16:07
16:07
16:08
Speaker 15
-
Speaker 15
Thank you. And like. Firstly, can I thank the honourable member for Horsham for securing the debate. Um, like honourable friends here, I've supported my constituent Emma and her campaigning on this issue. Um and like many colleagues here, I've been here in this place now for two years, and it's the third time I've been in this debate in those two years. So on that point, and I hear that point, what the minister says about research, but on that point, I think what supporters will want to know is what assurance we won't be having a similar conversation again next year, and the confidence that we have that.
On what the minister has just said about research and going forward, that we will have made some progress in the next 12 months. So I'd like the Minister to give some comments on that point, please, chair.
On what the minister has just said about research and going forward, that we will have made some progress in the next 12 months. So I'd like the Minister to give some comments on that point, please, chair.
16:08
Speaker 20
-
Speaker 20
Well, I thank him for that intervention, and I I suppose in a nutshell, what I'm trying to lay out is the fact that it isn't an either or question. There is a tremendous amount of work going on in terms of the research that's going into cancer more broadly, and lobular breast cancer as a vitally important subset of all of that work. I think the challenge we have is around the idea of ring fencing, £20 million, because, um, ring. Fencing is, is not the standard process.
The standard process is to have applications that are subject to peer review and judged in open competition, with awards being made on the basis of the importance of the topic to the public and health and care services, value for money and scientific quality. So I think there is I think if there is a difference of view in the chamber today, it is around whether we we are about the ecosystem of cutting edge research and applications and competitive process that drives the. Based on the principles that I've just outlined, or we.
We have a ring fenced fund at the current time. I have to be absolutely clear and straight with the hon. Gentleman. My hon. Friend the the government is not of the view that a ring fencing approach is the right way to go, because the. The worry is that it could potentially cut across the more ecosystem based approach that we're seeking to nurture and foster, which we believe, in the end, will deliver better outcomes with. The honourable lady would like to come.
The standard process is to have applications that are subject to peer review and judged in open competition, with awards being made on the basis of the importance of the topic to the public and health and care services, value for money and scientific quality. So I think there is I think if there is a difference of view in the chamber today, it is around whether we we are about the ecosystem of cutting edge research and applications and competitive process that drives the. Based on the principles that I've just outlined, or we.
We have a ring fenced fund at the current time. I have to be absolutely clear and straight with the hon. Gentleman. My hon. Friend the the government is not of the view that a ring fencing approach is the right way to go, because the. The worry is that it could potentially cut across the more ecosystem based approach that we're seeking to nurture and foster, which we believe, in the end, will deliver better outcomes with. The honourable lady would like to come.
16:10
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
In. Ministers thankfully clarified some of the questions that I was just going to ask. But, um, so the minister says that it's not necessarily looking to ring fence the 20 million, but he did mention that we were waiting for applications for research. But has the Lobular moonshot project not already put forward some kind of ideas about the research?I just wanted some clarification on that, because obviously, the minister had mentioned that you that he stands ready to support this project. So I just wanted some more specific questions about, um, he mentioned that we're waiting for applications for research, but whether what they've already submitted or talked about was within what he just mentioned.
16:11
Speaker 20
-
Speaker 20
I thank her for that intervention. Um, as I. Mentioned earlier, unfortunately, I'm not the lead minister on this issue, so I don't have the most up to date information on the proposal that has been submitted. Um, so if it's okay with her, I will speak with my colleague, uh, my hon. Friend the member for Washington and Gateshead South, and will write to her on that subject to provide an update on exactly where the proposal is in terms of the overall process that we're going through.
Have I correctly understood her intervention?Okay. Thank you. That's what we'll do.
Have I correctly understood her intervention?Okay. Thank you. That's what we'll do.
16:12
Speaker 16
-
Speaker 16
Yeah. I do think that way, and I do acknowledge this. He is substituting for for another excellent minister. And I'm sorry he's not here because she is fantastic. The but we do ring fence money for for brain tumour research. And I know that the community wants more money. So I'm not I'm not saying that's the gold standard, but we have we have made that choice because we did recognise the public concern about that. And there is public concern about lobular cancer.
The feeling that these people are being left behind. It's fantastic that we've got better screening and that's coming on board. But ultimately people need a treatment if they are diagnosed at that screening process. So so he did highlight that there is a competitive bidding process. Is it the case that the bids are not good enough?And if that's the case, can we invest money in improving the quality of those bids?As I said earlier, bring in better staff, perhaps from overseas, or invest in PhD students to work in this area.
Thank you.
The feeling that these people are being left behind. It's fantastic that we've got better screening and that's coming on board. But ultimately people need a treatment if they are diagnosed at that screening process. So so he did highlight that there is a competitive bidding process. Is it the case that the bids are not good enough?And if that's the case, can we invest money in improving the quality of those bids?As I said earlier, bring in better staff, perhaps from overseas, or invest in PhD students to work in this area.
Thank you.
16:13
16:13
16:14
Speaker 20
-
Speaker 20
Thank you for giving way. I think I think there is a space in between the two and and actually, I fully respect that the government for as wonderful as the Lobular moonshot campaign are, I can respect why the government would say we can't allow campaign groups to dictate which universities get X amounts of millions of pounds for particular projects. And the value in this being a peer reviewed process through a sort of competitive ecosystem. But, but there is a space where we can go beyond a highlight notice where, where the government could specifically say, we want research that will answer these specific sets of research questions.
And I wonder if that's something that he could take back to his colleagues and consider.
And I wonder if that's something that he could take back to his colleagues and consider.
16:14
16:14
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
Yes, I will absolutely take that back. And I understand the I understand absolutely the point he's making around having a specific call for proposals. So that is something that I will absolutely look at, discuss that with my colleague and and come back to him on that point. So our, our approach to funding research is through open and fair competition and peer review to ensure that the highest quality proposals most likely to deliver real impact for patients are funded without imposing financial targets or limits.
We also recognise that international research cooperation is fundamental to driving medical breakthroughs and saving lives. That is why the HSC participates in and influences the EU cancer Mission, which aims to improve the lives of more than 3 million people affected by cancer by 2030. Through multi-country research, calls and activities for breast cancer. This includes a focus on driving screening innovation, including the mammoth Screen project to develop safe, non-invasive, microwave based imaging for more accurate screening, which is supported by UK re the. Government's National Cancer Plan for England, published earlier this year, sets out our ambition to improve cancer outcomes and ensure that by 2035, 3 in 4 people diagnosed with cancer survive for five years or more.
Research, innovation and and earlier diagnosis are central to achieving that ambition. We know that too many women with lobular breast cancer face delays in diagnosis, because this form of cancer can be more difficult to detect. That is why the work being championed by the Lobular moonshot project is so important. The plan recognises that improving outcomes depends on strengthening research, supporting innovation and bringing together researchers, clinicians, charities, industry and patients to tackle some of the biggest challenges in cancer care. That spirit of collaboration is exactly what we have seen through the Lobular Moonshot project.
Through continued engagement with campaigners, researchers and patients. We want to support progress towards a better understanding of lobular breast cancer and ultimately, improvements in diagnosis, treatment and outcomes for the women affected by it. More broadly, the plan is not only about improving clinical outcomes, it is about improving people's experience of cancer care through more personalised support and better coordinated services. We want to ensure that every patient receives high quality care and support throughout their cancer journey. The ambition of the National Cancer Plan is clear to combine the strengths of our NHS, our research community and our life sciences sector so that patients benefit from the very best cancer care.
That includes people living with lobular breast cancer who deserve the same progress, hope and opportunity as every other cancer patient. The Department for Health and Social Care was pleased to discuss the issue of NHS breast cancer screening at the petitions debate opened by my hon. Friend the member for North Ayrshire and Arran. Last month. The NHS breast screening programme offers all women in England between the ages of 50 and the 71st birthday. The opportunity to be screened every three years for breast cancer to help detect abnormalities and intervene early to reduce the number of lives lost to invasive breast cancer.
In addition, some younger women are at increased risk of breast cancer because of genetics or their family history are eligible for earlier, more frequent screening, sometimes using MRI rather than mammogram. We are also investing in research to improve the early diagnosis of breast cancer through the early detection, using infant through early detection, using information technology, technology and health. The Edith trial, which is backed by £11 million of government support via the niHr, almost 700,000 women from across the country, will take part in the trial to test whether using AI to support radiologists increases the number of cancers detected in women taking part in the National Breast Cancer Screening Programme.
The trial will evaluate multiple AI technologies to assist radiologists in screening mammograms for signs of cancer. This may enable one specialist to complete the process safely, freeing up hundreds of radiologists to tackle waiting lists and rising cancer rates. So my message to the research community today is clear. Research funding remains available, and this funding does not have a ceiling. We know that recent advances in technology and data science create a timely opportunity to accelerate progress. Our investment in research means that the UK is well positioned to lead research on this topic.
We will continue to strongly encourage research applications, and we stand ready to support you to develop and submit high quality, ambitious proposals in remit for review. Our belief is that this approach will maximise the opportunity to see major steps forward in delivering better outcomes for those with lobular breast cancer through research. So I'd like to thank honourable members and you, Madam Chair, for your time today. Thank you.
We also recognise that international research cooperation is fundamental to driving medical breakthroughs and saving lives. That is why the HSC participates in and influences the EU cancer Mission, which aims to improve the lives of more than 3 million people affected by cancer by 2030. Through multi-country research, calls and activities for breast cancer. This includes a focus on driving screening innovation, including the mammoth Screen project to develop safe, non-invasive, microwave based imaging for more accurate screening, which is supported by UK re the. Government's National Cancer Plan for England, published earlier this year, sets out our ambition to improve cancer outcomes and ensure that by 2035, 3 in 4 people diagnosed with cancer survive for five years or more.
Research, innovation and and earlier diagnosis are central to achieving that ambition. We know that too many women with lobular breast cancer face delays in diagnosis, because this form of cancer can be more difficult to detect. That is why the work being championed by the Lobular moonshot project is so important. The plan recognises that improving outcomes depends on strengthening research, supporting innovation and bringing together researchers, clinicians, charities, industry and patients to tackle some of the biggest challenges in cancer care. That spirit of collaboration is exactly what we have seen through the Lobular Moonshot project.
Through continued engagement with campaigners, researchers and patients. We want to support progress towards a better understanding of lobular breast cancer and ultimately, improvements in diagnosis, treatment and outcomes for the women affected by it. More broadly, the plan is not only about improving clinical outcomes, it is about improving people's experience of cancer care through more personalised support and better coordinated services. We want to ensure that every patient receives high quality care and support throughout their cancer journey. The ambition of the National Cancer Plan is clear to combine the strengths of our NHS, our research community and our life sciences sector so that patients benefit from the very best cancer care.
That includes people living with lobular breast cancer who deserve the same progress, hope and opportunity as every other cancer patient. The Department for Health and Social Care was pleased to discuss the issue of NHS breast cancer screening at the petitions debate opened by my hon. Friend the member for North Ayrshire and Arran. Last month. The NHS breast screening programme offers all women in England between the ages of 50 and the 71st birthday. The opportunity to be screened every three years for breast cancer to help detect abnormalities and intervene early to reduce the number of lives lost to invasive breast cancer.
In addition, some younger women are at increased risk of breast cancer because of genetics or their family history are eligible for earlier, more frequent screening, sometimes using MRI rather than mammogram. We are also investing in research to improve the early diagnosis of breast cancer through the early detection, using infant through early detection, using information technology, technology and health. The Edith trial, which is backed by £11 million of government support via the niHr, almost 700,000 women from across the country, will take part in the trial to test whether using AI to support radiologists increases the number of cancers detected in women taking part in the National Breast Cancer Screening Programme.
The trial will evaluate multiple AI technologies to assist radiologists in screening mammograms for signs of cancer. This may enable one specialist to complete the process safely, freeing up hundreds of radiologists to tackle waiting lists and rising cancer rates. So my message to the research community today is clear. Research funding remains available, and this funding does not have a ceiling. We know that recent advances in technology and data science create a timely opportunity to accelerate progress. Our investment in research means that the UK is well positioned to lead research on this topic.
We will continue to strongly encourage research applications, and we stand ready to support you to develop and submit high quality, ambitious proposals in remit for review. Our belief is that this approach will maximise the opportunity to see major steps forward in delivering better outcomes for those with lobular breast cancer through research. So I'd like to thank honourable members and you, Madam Chair, for your time today. Thank you.
16:19
16:19
16:19
Speaker 16
-
Speaker 16
Thank you chair. And I'd like to thank all members here present. There's some really powerful points made. And I'd also particularly like to to thank the Minister for his reply. I have to say, I find that the most revealing reply of everything I've heard over over the past years. So considering he's not even, uh, it's not even strictly his portfolio. I'm very impressed. And I also hope that he would agree, or if not himself, one of his colleagues to follow up after this debate because he's he's raised some very interesting points that I'd like to consult, uh, with my colleagues behind me, um, to, to, to follow up on because I do think he's, he, we're getting an understanding there of the processes behind what are the processes within government to make make these decisions.
Overall, it's just, you know, from the outside, it's very frustrating. We cannot tell I cannot tell is the government when a government is stalling or when a government is really doing something?I mean that in general. I'm not talking about this. I've had a number of meetings with completely different departments this week, as it happens with ministers. It's very hard to tell when we're just being fobbed off and when we're actually on a path to to a solution. I've only been in politics a couple of years.
Forgive my naivety. So so I'm very interested to hear what he says. And I felt he was more honest. So I would really appreciate that opportunity either himself or his colleagues. Um, after this, um, in the coming days. Finally, I would of course, like I must pay tribute again to, to Doctor Susan Michaelis for all the work that she, she has done on this day one year ago. Of course, is her anniversary. And, and beyond that to all, all the the lobular ladies um who are doing it not just for themselves, but for every literally for everybody.
This is a worldwide problem. It's not, it's not just us. So so I pay tribute to them all. Uh, and I thank everyone today. Thank you.
Overall, it's just, you know, from the outside, it's very frustrating. We cannot tell I cannot tell is the government when a government is stalling or when a government is really doing something?I mean that in general. I'm not talking about this. I've had a number of meetings with completely different departments this week, as it happens with ministers. It's very hard to tell when we're just being fobbed off and when we're actually on a path to to a solution. I've only been in politics a couple of years.
Forgive my naivety. So so I'm very interested to hear what he says. And I felt he was more honest. So I would really appreciate that opportunity either himself or his colleagues. Um, after this, um, in the coming days. Finally, I would of course, like I must pay tribute again to, to Doctor Susan Michaelis for all the work that she, she has done on this day one year ago. Of course, is her anniversary. And, and beyond that to all, all the the lobular ladies um who are doing it not just for themselves, but for every literally for everybody.
This is a worldwide problem. It's not, it's not just us. So so I pay tribute to them all. Uh, and I thank everyone today. Thank you.