Non-surgical Aesthetic and Cosmetic Treatments

Helen Morgan Excerpts

Thursday 11th September 2025 Westminster Hall

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir Desmond, and to take part in a debate where all the contributions have been so thoughtful. I thank the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) for securing the debate and making an excellent speech about not only regulation, but the wider issues of negative body image, advertising, eating disorders and other medical conditions that we should consider as part of this debate.

As we have heard, non-surgical aesthetic and cosmetic treatments have become increasingly popular, including, but not restricted to, lip fillers, injectables, thread lifts, semi-permanent make up, laser treatments, piercing and tattoos. While there is a registration scheme in England for some treatments, such as epilation, tattooing, piercings, semi-permanent make up and acupuncture, some of the riskier and newer types of procedure are not within the scope of the current regulatory regime.

People paying for a procedure need to be confident that the person carrying out that procedure is appropriately qualified. Currently, there is no single system to ensure that that is the case. Distressing reports of lives shattered by botched cosmetic treatments—tragic cases such as that of Alice Webb, whose buttock augmentation procedure, as we have heard, was carried out by someone with no surgical qualifications—must drive meaningful change in how we approach aesthetic and cosmetic treatments.

It is crucial that anyone carrying out invasive treatment is properly licensed and meets high standards of safety. There are too many instances where that is not the case. I was horrified to read in The Guardian a story about a lady in Leeds who booked into a clinic to get something called an endolift procedure, a laser treatment that works by inserting a thin micro-optical wire deep into the skin layer and is used to boost collagen and melt little pockets of fat. She had visited the clinic before for other cosmetic treatments and thought that she was in safe hands, but she was not. After paying £100 for what looked like a good deal, she was administered a counterfeit version of the procedure, which normally costs around £2,000. It has left her with intense facial bruising and she describes herself as “maimed”.

The BBC reported on another horrifying case of a lady in Hull, who arranged more than 30 separate treatments at a clinic, including a breast filler procedure and facial fillers. She thought she had done her due diligence by checking the clinic’s reputation; its website claimed it had

“won Best Aesthetics Clinic in Yorkshire in 2022 at the England Business Awards”

and referred to the man who saw her as a doctor. He was actually a former tattoo artist who had bought an honorary doctorate in business consultancy on the internet. After multiple facial procedures, her face kept swelling, with this apparent doctor claiming that it was from an insect bite and urging her to continue. Eventually she needed hospital treatment, with plastic surgeons confirming that she had undergone botched procedures and suffered a subsequent infection, leading to the difficulties she was experiencing. More than two years later, she claims that she sees “a gargoyle” when looking at herself, and lives in a “nightmare every single day”.

Multiple other complaints have been made about the same clinic, all from people who were under the impression that the clinical director was a licensed medical professional. It is unacceptable that this could have happened. There is no mandatory licensing for those providing potentially dangerous treatments such as dermal fillers and botulinum toxin, as we have heard, while highly risky treatments such as the Brazilian butt lift are frequently administered by individuals with little or no training.

While a small handful of areas across England have introduced their own licensing schemes, including London, Nottingham and Essex, other under-resourced local authorities rely on a fragmented hodgepodge of byelaws, statutes and tangential regulations to try to regulate practitioners in their area. Many lack the resources to provide effective regulation. Can the Minister reassure us in her closing remarks that, if local authorities are to carry out any new scheme, they will be adequately resourced to do so?

Loopholes remain even for surgical procedures. For instance, any doctor on the GMC register can legally perform cosmetic surgery in the private sector, regardless of whether they have the relevant surgical training. Complex procedures such as liposuction are being performed by non-surgeons and potentially in non-clinical environments. That is without doubt a huge risk to patient safety. As things stand, not only are consumers being placed at risk of life-changing difficulties, but the NHS—and therefore the taxpayer—is footing the bill to pick up the pieces when things go wrong.

I have heard it asserted that any standardised regulation or licensing is somehow an impediment to people’s choice and self-expression, but I am sure that a lack of safety is not a crucial part of the appeal of getting these procedures done. If we do not act now, many more people will face unwanted, irreversible, life-changing and even life-threatening consequences.

It is notable that 90% of people working in the industry who were surveyed in 2020 support a new licensing regime. They know, as do the public, that no one benefits from the current arrangement other than those who want to cut corners and ignore their duty of care to clients. The Liberal Democrats therefore support organisations such as the Royal College of Surgeons in calling for a licensing scheme for non-surgical cosmetic procedures, such as lip filling and liquid enhancements. It is astonishing that one is not already in place.

The last Government consulted on a mandatory licensing scheme for non-surgical cosmetic procedures, but it has never been implemented. Minimum standards of safety, including training and premises that are clinically safe, are simple, basic steps that can make a huge difference. I welcome the Government’s announcement that they will be consulting on bringing forward new legislation to tackle this issue. We urge them to do so as soon as possible, and they will have our support to ensure a robust and speedy implementation of regulations.

In closing, I also draw the Minister’s attention to the issue of data collection on cosmetic procedures. There is no systematic collection of data on treatments and their outcome, even for the most invasive treatments. That makes it incredibly hard—or even impossible—for consumers or the Government to assess the risks associated with cosmetic procedures or what licensing changes might be needed. I urge the Minister to address this issue as the consultation progresses. As I have said, the Government will have our support in introducing a suitable licensing regime.