(1 week ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
What a pleasure it is to serve under your chairship, Mr Betts. I thank the hon. Member for Wyre Forest (Mark Garnier) for leading the debate. He obviously has an incredible interest in the space sector; if he ever appears on “Mastermind”, this will be his chosen subject. I mean that in a nice way, because I believe that we can all benefit from his interest and knowledge. I am sure that the Minister agrees.
Space assets are crucial to United Kingdom national infrastructure, as well as safety and defence mechanisms such as navigation and communication. Modern technology is a wonderful thing—I do not quite understand it all the time, but that is just me—but we must not underestimate the contribution made by our space sector. For that reason, it is great to be here to make a contribution.
It is always a pleasure to see the Minister in her place. She is a friend of many of us in Northern Ireland, and we have brought many subjects to her attention. I appreciate that she always responds in a positive way, and Northern Ireland MPs will vouch for that.
I am going to give a Northern Ireland perspective. Some people, perhaps some not too far away, may wonder what Northern Ireland’s input into the space sector is. First, it is 8,000 jobs, so let us be clear that it is not just a small sector in Northern Ireland. It is an important sector; we are to the fore in ensuring that Northern Ireland plays a growing and successful part in the space industry, with a focus on satellite technology, aerospace engineering and data analytics. In particular, Northern Ireland has a rich history in aerospace engineering, defence and aerospace projects in my constituency—that is obviously where my interest comes from—as well as across the whole of Northern Ireland.
In Upper Bann, I see at first hand the potential of the space industry, with my area having one of the strongest advanced manufacturing bases in Northern Ireland and being home to companies that contribute to aerospace and high-precision engineering, both of which are important to aerospace sector technologies. Does my hon. Friend agree that, to release Northern Ireland’s full potential in aerospace and in the contribution that it can make to the UK-wide air strategy, we need a seat at the table? Any future UK policies on aerospace and the space industry need to have Northern Ireland at the table.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. In fairness to the Minister, I feel that her intention is to ensure that that will happen. I hope she will confirm that today. It is important.
Our aerospace heritage brings more than 8,000 jobs to Northern Ireland. I am sure—indeed, I know—that the Minister is very much aware of the current breakdown of jobs, with Magellan Aerospace back home and the ongoing discussions regarding the Spirit AeroSystems takeover, which will have an impact on jobs in my constituency and further afield, including my hon. Friend’s constituency. I will just let the Minister know in advance that topical question No. 6 tomorrow will be on Spirit AeroSystems. The Parliamentary Private Secretary asked me yesterday to make sure that I got the booking in for that. I will send on the question officially, but that is what it will be about.
Northern Ireland aerospace has a 70-plus-year heritage and contributes £151 million to UK GDP. I know Thales operates in other parts, but some £81 million is in Northern Ireland itself, which highlights the importance of our contribution to the UK space sector and the economy. The Minister has visited Thales and will do so again, I hope, in the not-too-distant future. We cannot underestimate the impact that such industries have in the UK economy. Northern Ireland has successfully attracted investment and funding for space-related projects specifically, and we are keen to do more of that, as my hon. Friend the Member for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart) said. The Department for the Economy in the Northern Ireland Executive, for example, is actively promoting the growth of the space sector. It is very much a core issue for us back in Northern Ireland, including in the Department.
To give some information about what we do back home, on 24 May just over a year ago, Queen’s University Belfast was at the centre of plans to harvest solar power in space to produce a potentially endless supply of net zero energy, to help turn around the world’s climate crisis. That is very futuristic, but what do we know? Will the futuristic things we saw in “Star Trek”—“Beam me up, Scotty”—ever happen? I do not know, but with the progress of technology, someday it might be possible.
The fact that Queen’s University is involved and out there is an indication that such partnerships can very much show the way forward. Their incredible, fantastic work has brought two huge industries of the future together. It will give opportunities in the sector to hundreds of students who have a real interest in working in it. This is not just about today, but about the future and preparing our university students for that future, so that they can be part of it. The Minister might wish to respond to that as well.
In 2021, the then Conservative Government published a national space strategy. I am sure that the hon. Member for Wyre Forest, who introduced the debate, had some input into that. It described the UK’s 10-year vision to build one of the most innovative and attractive space economies in the world. That was the previous Conservative Government saying that, so I am interested to hear the Minister’s thoughts on progressing that 10-year plan and where we are now, because we all—the then Opposition, too, I think I am right in saying—supported that strategy and plan, as we could all see its progressive and visionary potential.
The strategy included the UK becoming the first country in Europe to achieve a small satellite launch from a UK spaceport, and establishing itself as a leader in commercial small satellite launch. The hon. Member for Wyre Forest mentioned that, and the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) would have, I am sure, had he been present, although the attraction of judging blackface ewes might just overtake it as a subject, because that is a hands-on relationship with his constituents.
Satellites are used for many different things, including navigation, communications, targeting munitions and threat analysis. We can be to the forefront in that. Currently, the UK relies heavily on the US and other nations within the EU for defence-related services. I therefore believe it is pivotal that we in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland are in a position to use our own methods and technology to preserve our own safety and support our own military. I know we cannot do everything by ourselves any more—it is not wise or focused to do that—but it is important that we have the potential to do some of our own stuff. We need to have the US and the EU, and to work within NATO, but we also need to have the ability to respond on our own merit and our own ability.
The Government reported that, between 2022 and 2024, the total value of contracts secured by the UK through the ESA was £844 million, but I believe that we must do more to fund our own industry, so that we can become leaders in paving the way in the space industry. There is no reason why the companies here in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland cannot do that. Setting out this case has always been a passion of the hon. Member for Wyre Forest; he has always pushed this, and we should all support him in how we take this forward.
To conclude, protecting the UK space sector affects several areas, whether it be safeguarding against threats to sustainability or monitoring space incidents. We must do more to protect it. The contribution to the economy made by the devolved Administrations—this is one of the great beauties of this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, where four come together as one—pushed by the Minister here in Westminster to all our advantage, and by the devolved Administrations, cannot and will not be ignored.
I look to the Minister again for commitment and enthusiasm in ensuring that jobs are protected and the best decisions are made for the benefit of the United Kingdom space and aerospace sectors. I believe we can all benefit. I think the Minister is committed to that, and I look forward to her answers.
(2 weeks, 1 day ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes), as we all do, for leading the debate and setting the scene incredibly well.
The Groceries Code Adjudicator is imperative in setting out standards for fair trading between large stores and their suppliers. The right hon. Gentleman referred to doing his shopping locally. I am the same, but I know that for the generation after me—my son, my daughter-in-law and all their family—Amazon is probably their first contact. Life is changing, and it seems cheaper to do it that way.
People are becoming more interested in the food that they are eating and where it is sourced. I have been a member of the all-party parliamentary group for eggs, pigs and poultry for most of my time in Parliament. I am of a generation for whom there is no better way to start a day than with two boiled eggs. I remember the ’60s—that is how old I am—when the advertisements on TV said, “Go to work on an egg.” Well, I could go to work on two eggs and finish the day with two eggs as well. I am probably keeping the egg industry going just with my own purchases.
I understand the importance of the issue for the livelihoods of farmers in my constituency. The GCA’s jurisdiction extends across the entire United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: it regulates designated retailers with an annual groceries turnover exceeding £1 billion. In Northern Ireland, the GCA’s role is particularly significant. The Ulster Farmers Union— I declare an interest as a member—has highlighted the GCA’s importance in maintaining fair trade practices amid ever more challenging economic conditions. It believes that
“the GCA performs an essential role in a modern, sustainable and competitive grocery market in the UK.”
There is no doubt that reducing or weakening the powers of the GCA will put suppliers and consumers at risk. In my constituency of Strangford, large chains such as Tesco, Asda and SPAR have contracts with numerous suppliers, and their contributions keep the sector going. I have a great relationship with many local suppliers in my constituency, including the likes of Mash Direct and Willowbrook Foods, which provide fresh potato and vegetable dishes. One example is a local farmer, Roy Lyttle—a small farmer, but a decent enough producer—who has just developed a new salad product, Lyttle Leaves. I believe it will take off.
Local farmers and butchers, such as Carnduff butchers and Colin McKee’s, are incredibly popular throughout my constituency. The issue is that grocery inflation has risen to 4.1%, the highest in 15 months, and there is always a possibility that it will continue to rise. That highlights the financial pressure on suppliers and manufacturers to provide products at a competitive rate and ensure that they can make a profit with their wonderful produce.
My hon. Friend will know that farmers in Northern Ireland feed more than 10 million people across the United Kingdom every year. Does he agree that our farmers are treated as shock absorbers? They carry all the risk and receive the least reward. They are still being relentlessly squeezed by powerful retailers and processors. Does he therefore agree that the GCA’s role needs to go further in protecting our farmers from unjust and unbalanced practices?
I wholeheartedly agree. My hon. Friend’s words are on record, the Minister is here, and hopefully he will respond in a positive way.
Workers have reported feeling lonely, stressed and isolated. They find it hard to connect with others; they often work alone or as part of a small workforce. They are the ones who produce the food on our farms, and they must be properly rewarded for their actions to ensure that supermarkets always have produce to sell. Unfortunately, with inflation rates, people are working harder and under more pressure, with little recognition.
The scope of the problem is highlighted by a 2025 BFAWU survey that shows that nearly 60% of food workers are not earning enough to meet all their basic needs such as rent, heating, electricity and food. Some 86% say that they have had to reduce their heating to save money. It is important in this debate to give the perspective of workers, because they are the ones doing all the real graft.
I will conclude with this point: we must look at the sustainability of the UK food supply chain and ensure that suppliers have access to large food suppliers at a decent price that reflects their work. There are calls for DEFRA here and the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs back home to work together, as the GCA applies to the whole United Kingdom. We must do more to protect the collective UK food supply. I hope that the Groceries Code Adjudicator will commit to doing so in Northern Ireland. I thank the adjudicator for doing his bit to protect the farmers and suppliers of Strangford.
(3 months ago)
Commons ChamberControversial already, Madam Deputy Speaker; my goodness. I thank the hon. Lady for that intervention and I will put forward the case that we should all be looking to be as one under St Patrick —Scotland, Wales, England and Northern Ireland.
Believing he had been called by God to Christianise Ireland, St Patrick later returned to Ireland as a missionary. How wonderful it is to see the beauty of the Union at work in St Patrick’s life: a British man who fell in love with the people but, more importantly, whose love for God made him return to the bosom of those who had mistreated him, having been kept in slavery for six years. We all love the story of the little man coming good; we all fight in this House for the wee man and wee woman all the time, and that is the story of St Patrick, a former slave who absolutely changed the nation for God and for good.
I commend my hon. Friend for securing this debate. Sadly, many now see St Patrick’s day as a time for drinking and excess and that is against everything Patrick stood for. Does my hon. Friend agree that Patrick was in fact ahead of his time, with his exposure of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the fact he told people about their need of salvation, of the death of Jesus Christ on the Cross and their need of repentance? So when we wear our shamrock we need not think of the myths and legends but of the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.
I am going to come on to that now—my hon. Friend is absolutely right. I have long marvelled at the way St Patrick made theology understandable for those who had no education, no access to holy books, and no ability to read them. He came with a message of love and action. This is the St Patrick I believe we should celebrate and honour: a man who loved Jesus and wanted the world to know Him, not hampered by denomination or doctrine. St Patrick’s message is as applicable today as it was 1,600 years ago. Christ has a plan and a purpose for those who place their trust in Him, and those of us who serve Him have a purpose to glorify God and to help our fellow man.
The cultural history of St Patrick is clear throughout my constituency, with the touches of his message spanning throughout it. Indeed, as we walk through the hallowed halls of Parliament St Patrick’s prominent position is clear in Central Lobby. I glance up daily with pride at his place within this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, as symbolised along with St David, St Andrew and St George. It is wonderful to have us all together as one within this great United Kingdom.
(4 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I thank my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone) for securing this important debate.
Across rural areas, including in my constituency of Stratford-on-Avon, we are seeing too many high streets lined with empty shops, despite strong demand from small businesses eager to establish themselves. We have sadly seen announcements of Lloyds Bank closing branches in Alcester and Shipston-on-Stour We have been promised a banking hub for Alcester, and now we need to ensure that banking services are kept in Shipston.
Our small businesses are the backbones of the rural economy, and they are struggling. That is not just an issue of declining footfall, but of landlords who are holding out for unrealistic rents, and the current business rates regime.
The hon. Member will know that many shops have been resilient to increased costs over recent years, but does she agree that the hike in national insurance contributions and increase in wage in the recent Budget have created a cliff edge for businesses? We will see the hospitality sector fall over, and there needs to be a bespoke support package in place for those businesses.
I completely agree. Many hospitality businesses have written to me about the damage from the hike in national insurance contributions.
Prime retail spaces have been left unused while our rural economy struggles. The old BHS building in Stratford-upon-Avon, which is located at one of the town’s principal gateways, has been left empty and derelict for almost 10 years. Local authorities must be given powers to step in and act. Strengthening compulsory purchase powers is a step in the right direction, allowing communities to take back control of neglected properties and revitalise their high streets. High street rental auctions will make a difference on empty properties up and down the country, and I hope to see them rolled out in my constituency soon. With the right support, our rural towns and villages can become thriving hubs of local enterprise, boosting the economy, social inclusion and community spirit.
(6 months ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention; I do not want to give him a big head, but his interventions often capture the focus of a debate in one sentence. If the companies have forgotten or are unaware, it is time that they were aware. The question is how we can make that happen.
As I say, only 44% of organisations and workplaces have policies in place for staff with a terminal illness, so if a worker with a terminal illness loses their job, they lose their income. The impact could not be any more real: they may lose any death in service payments that they have earned through their lifetime of work, because those are payable only to those who die while still in employment. The hon. Member for Corby and East Northamptonshire referred to the lady who stayed at work for her social circle of friends. Perhaps it helped her—I am sorry to say this—to ensure that when she passed away she had the payments that she should have had.
I agree with the Marie Curie charity that there is therefore a need for strengthened employment rights for people with a terminal illness, alongside an improved safety net to provide safety or support through our welfare system. When the Minister responds, I am sure that he or his civil servants and staff will have some figures from Marie Curie; if there has not been engagement with the organisation, I suggest that there should be.
I commend the hon. Member for Corby and East Northamptonshire (Lee Barron) for raising this important issue. Does my hon. Friend agree that there also needs to be workplace protection for the parents of children who have been given a terminal diagnosis? When a child is given a terminal diagnosis in such tragic circumstances, parents are worried because they have to leave their work to care for their children. Does he agree that there needs to be better protection for them?
I thank my hon. Friend. Others might not have thought about that issue, because there are always the two adults—the mum and dad who are in a relationship—and it is their child, but if their child has a terminal illness, how does that impact them in work? They need to be there to take their child to the hospital, and to be there for their child in the last days of their life. I know that the Minister understands those issues; perhaps he can give us an encouraging answer to these questions.
Life is tough for families in full-time employment, never mind those with reduced income and greater costs. Changes must be made to universal credit— I know that that is not the Minister’s responsibility—to allow those in full-time employment to access help and support for their care and time off work. All my staff members understand the benefits system very well, but I am fortunate to have one particular staff member who spends every day of her five and a half days a week—the half day is probably voluntary, because she is a lady with compassion and understanding—working on benefits. As elected representatives, we try to offer all we can to our constituents. All Members do. That lady fills out universal credit applications, personal independence payment applications, employment and support allowance applications or, probably in most cases, attendance allowance applications, although sometimes it is for families with small children.
These are really difficult times. I do the forms myself; I am not better than anybody else. There is a box on the second or third page that asks whether the applicant has a terminal illness. When you tick that box, it moves you into a different system. I have to be fair to the Department: when that box is ticked, the Department moves immediately. I know that from cases that we have done through my office, and other Members will confirm it when they get their chance to speak. An urgency is put into the process and it quickly moves on.
The hon. Member for Corby and East Northamptonshire highlighted in communication to Members that the purpose of this debate is clear:
“The last thing someone with a terminal diagnosis and their family should be worrying about at the end of their life is how they will be able to pay the bills.”
Wow. The Government should remove that equation for people. Many people’s key social networks exist at work, and I believe that those who are terminally ill should have the choice of when they finish work. That is what the debate is all about.
I agree wholeheartedly with the hon. Gentleman’s view. More than that, I will work with him and with the Government to achieve that—to simply do more for those with terminal cancer. Just because charities do such an incredible job of raising funds and caring, that does not absolve our Government and our Minister of their responsibility; I say that with fairness and with respect. It is our duty to ensure that we fulfil these obligations. We must do better.
(7 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberIt would be remiss of me not to take this opportunity to congratulate the 47th President of the United States of America, Donald Trump. The fact that President Trump made such a comeback after one term out of office should be a warning to this Government: if they continue on a trajectory of burdening ordinary working-class people and businesses financially, and with their anti-life policies, their stay in office will be equally short.
The theme for today’s debate is rebuilding Britain, yet in reality the Budget has the potential to rock the very foundations of the United Kingdom. This Government’s Budget has dealt the most devastating blow to so many: 10 million pensioners are left reeling from the decision to cut the winter fuel payment, with many now having to choose between heating and eating; and the WASPI women have been failed again, as there is no provision to right the wrongs that have impacted so many women across the United Kingdom, including in my constituency of Upper Bann.
Prior to the Budget, I had warned this House that in the space of a month, four cafés in Portadown in my constituency closed their doors. This Budget will undoubtedly close many more. The requirement on businesses to pay additional national insurance contributions will tell a tale. This is not a Budget for working people, despite the rise in the living wage, because that rise will be swallowed up by higher retail costs due to the rise in national insurance contributions for employers. It is a cause-and-effect algorithm. This Budget hits workers and businesses.
The Prime Minister and his Chancellor have betrayed our nation’s farmers, decimated our family farms and jeopardised our proud rural heritage. The introduction of a 20% inheritance tax on family farms valued at over £1 million marks an unprecedented and unjust assault on the backbone of our nation. No farms or farmers means no home-grown food, and rising costs as we have to import food to eat. This policy threatens the survival of family-run farms, forcing many, especially in Northern Ireland, to consider selling off land or assets to meet tax liabilities, thereby undermining the continuity of farming businesses across generations. For Northern Ireland, this tax burden looms heavy. Family farms will be dismantled to cover liabilities, eroding the very fabric of rural life.
I urge the Government to stop with the spin and, more importantly, stop the farm tax, and to implement policies that support our farmers, rather than hinder them. We must prioritise the sustainability of our agricultural sector to preserve our rural communities, and to ensure the prosperity of our nation, and food security, for future generations.
(1 year, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberI hear what the right hon. Member says. I can foresee it being seen as reasonable to extend the legislation to Northern Ireland in a way that will not apply to Scotland, given the position of a lot of colleagues in Scotland and without the Scottish Parliament and Scottish judiciary wanting to be part of that extension.
The shadow Secretary of State is making a powerful speech, particularly about the impact on the lives of the sub-postmasters. The 28 or so in Northern Ireland have experienced the same turmoil as those in Great Britain. We thank the shadow Secretary of State for his endorsement of Northern Ireland’s inclusion in the Bill. We would make a further call for that today.
I am grateful to the hon. Member for those words. I know that colleagues from Northern Ireland are keen to bring forward an amendment on that. I ask Ministers to reflect on the scale of political support that we have seen and are seeing, and to take the issue away for further consideration before the Committee stage, so that justice can be brought to the 27 sub-postmasters—I think—in Northern Ireland.
To conclude, for many people who watched the ITV adaptation of the Horizon scandal in January, it will have been hard to believe that the ongoing tragedy was not a work of fiction, so egregious and pernicious have the impacts been on people’s lives. However, it was not a TV show. It is very real and has had real-world impacts. Lessons must be learned and justice must be served. In the weeks after the drama, I believe attention sadly had to be turned away from the sub-postmasters and their needs, and the conversation became much more about the soap opera that has been seemingly ongoing with the management of the Post Office. Addressing that issue will demand serious attention, but the priority today should be providing sub-postmasters with justice. It is welcome that we have returned to that core issue today.
Labour will support the legislation. It is right that innocent people have their convictions overturned, not just so that they can begin to turn the page on the scandal, but so that it leads to the quick access to compensation that everybody rightly deserves. Not every story will finish with a happy ending. As we know, some people did not live to see this, and others have lost so much that their lives could never be put right. However, the actions we can take in this place can go at least some way to ensuring that the next chapter of the story of the sub-postmasters will be their own and will be based on the principles of justice and fair treatment that everyone wants to see.
(1 year, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberThe hon. Gentleman does contribute virtually every single time the issue is discussed, and I thank him for that. It is hugely important for postmasters in his constituency and further afield that his voice is contributing to those calling for the remedies needed. I am aware of the letter on this issue from the Post Office’s chief executive officer, and what he says; it was his choice to write that letter. Today’s statement, and the one on Thursday, illustrate that the letter had no influence on us; we think that introducing legislation is the right thing to do. We have always been clear that some guilty people will be made innocent through the process. We think that is a risk worth taking—the least worst option. As for the influence on compensation and other matters for individuals, we have ensured that there are independent processes running right through the compensation schemes. The advisory board is holding our feet to the fire very effectively, and I welcome its work.
I thank the Minister for his statement and his efforts. He will be aware of correspondence from the Northern Ireland Executive and the Department of Justice; my Northern Ireland colleagues have alluded to it. It is a rarity for three parties in Northern Ireland to agree on something, but I believe it is outrageous that Northern Ireland is being excluded from the legislation. Will the Minister redouble his efforts and rethink that? This Parliament is sovereign. Time and again, this Parliament has intervened with laws and legislation on devolved matters in Northern Ireland, so will he go away and urgently relook at this situation?
I thank the hon. Lady for her question. I can assure her that I will continue to engage with her on this matter, along with the relevant representatives from the Department of Justice in Northern Ireland, as will our officials. I understand her disappointment. I understand her preference, and the preference of some Ministers in the Justice Department, but we will continue that engagement and try to make sure that compensation in Northern Ireland is not denied or delayed; we do not want that in England and Wales, either.
(1 year, 5 months ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I thank the hon. Member for North West Leicestershire (Andrew Bridgen) for securing the debate and for his effort to bring it to the House. I have received a significant number of emails, and the consistent theme is a lack of trust. Trust is key, and constituents have a right to know that elected representatives take them seriously and work to find out why these excess deaths are occurring. Every death is a tragedy; in each home there is devastation. We see this in all our constituencies. I have sat with several families who have lost loved ones, and I am not satisfied with the answers they have been given. We owe it to them to restore trust and to be transparent about why death rates are higher than expected.
Ignoring the issue will only increase the anxiety and distress further. People deserve answers to why the numbers are high, what the cause is, whether deaths could have been avoided and who and what were responsible. We all know people who have died. No one could realistically deny that deaths are higher than expected. Too many families are left without answers. But what is the cause? That is what needs to be established. Are these deaths attributable to covid? Is it the vaccine? Is it misdiagnosis? Is it lack of access to treatment? Is it constituents choosing to stay at home?
I have two examples. One lady, who had had cancer and seemed completely clear of it, chose not to go back for a check-up and then died quickly after that. A gentleman who had a severe lung problem was denied drugs because of gaps in the assessment of the degradation of his lungs. He died very horribly and quickly at 56 years old. As has been said, a deafening silence will not reassure our constituents or ensure that we learn and respond effectively in future health pandemics.
The hon. Member makes an important point about cancer. Operations were cancelled and treatments delayed. More and more stories are coming to the fore around vaccinations of cancer patients, how that triggered other complications and caused deaths. Does he agree that more needs to be done to investigate that?
I thank the hon. Lady for that intervention, and I was coming on to that. Whatever the Minister is minded to say today, a proper understanding is needed of what is behind these excess deaths and the examples that have just been given.
We seem incapable in this country of talking openly about death. It will come to all of us, but we lack the courage to discuss it openly, and the consequences are widespread. Addressing the issue openly and transparently can only help our effort to bring healing and some comfort to grieving families.