Diethylstilbestrol: Intergenerational Impact

Jessica Toale Excerpts

Monday 29th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)]

I am grateful to have secured this important debate.

I begin by asking the House to imagine a young woman in Britain in the 1950s. She is pregnant, she may have struggled to conceive and she may already have experienced the heartbreak of miscarriage, so she is desperate to do everything that she can to protect her baby. She goes to the doctor, as many of us would. She is prescribed a drug and told that it may help to prevent miscarriage, help her carry that baby to term and even give her the healthy child she so desperately wants. Of course she takes it—why would she not? She trusts her doctor, she trusts the health system and above all she wants to do the best she can for her child. But then imagine her finding out, decades later, that the very medicine that she took to protect her child had in fact harmed her, harmed that child and may even have harmed her grandchildren as well. That is the reality of diethylstilbestrol or DES.

DES was widely prescribed as an anti-miscarriage drug between the 1930s and the 1970s. It was used to treat pregnancy complications and to supress breast milk, and it was prescribed to women who were looking to the medical profession for help. But DES was not the miracle drug they were told it was. Evidence emerged in the 1950s that not only was it ineffective, but that it was also dangerous. It has since been linked to breast cancer, cervical and vaginal cancers, infertility and a range of other serious reproductive and gynaecological issues. Yet despite the warning signs, the evidence of harm and the fact that other countries moved to withdraw or restrict its use, DES continued to be prescribed in Britain for decades. Around 300,000 women are estimated to have been given DES in the UK between 1939 and the 1970s.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Member for Bournemouth West (Jessica Toale) for securing the debate. I spoke to her beforehand to obtain her permission to intervene. As she rightly says, over 300,000 women in the UK were prescribed DES in one of the worst medical disasters in NHS history. Repercussions of the use of the drug, as the hon. Lady says, are intergenerational, as evidence shows negative effects on third generations. Does she agree that further research is needed to study the long-term effects of DES exposure to better understand the extent of its impact and ensure effective medical treatment for those affected by the drug? I commend her again and I look forward to hearing the Minister’s reply.

[Jessica Toale]

Yes, I agree that research is needed and that is one of the things that DES campaigners are calling for.

One of those 300,000 women was Rita, the mother of my constituent, Jan Hall. Rita was prescribed DES when she was pregnant with Jan, but when Jan was just a toddler, Rita died of breast cancer. She was only 32. Jan herself later developed cervical cancer in her twenties. Because of the surgeries she had to undergo, she was told she may never be able to have children. She lived not only with that physical consequence, but with decades of uncertainty, fear, grief and anger. Her daughters have experienced significant gynaecological health problems, and now Jan worries about her grandchildren as well.

Jan is not alone. Across the country, men, women and their families have come forward to share their stories and their experiences as victims of this scandal. Some of them are in the Gallery with us today and have allowed me to share some of their painful testimonies.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

One of the people in the Gallery is my constituent, Heather Farrant, who came to Parliament today with two of her three daughters. She has lived with the lifelong consequences of her mother’s exposure to DES. Will the hon. Lady commend Heather and all the campaigners for their bravery in speaking so publicly about something that has been hidden for a long time? Until Heather came to speak to me in my surgery, I had not heard of DES, and without those campaigners, we would not have known about it and been able to raise it here today.

[Jessica Toale]

It was a pleasure to meet Heather today, along with all the other campaigners. I thank them all for having shown such strength in coming forward to share their stories.

One of the cruellest impacts of DES, which sets it apart from other medical scandals, is that its consequences do not stop with the women who were prescribed it or their immediate children. There is growing evidence of intergenerational impacts affecting grandchildren, and possibly beyond. We do not yet know how far those consequences reach. That uncertainty is part of the harm that the families face.

Research suggests that women who took DES during pregnancy—the DES mothers—may face around a 30% higher chance of breast cancer. Female babies exposed in the womb—DES daughters—have around 40 times the risk of developing clear cell adenocarcinoma of the vagina and cervix. They also face increased risks of reproductive complications, including infertility, ectopic pregnancies, premature births and a range of other conditions and complications that we are learning about all the time.

Clare, who is in the Gallery today, described being robbed of her fertility and suffering ovarian failure, and later developing an autoimmune inflammatory condition. At the age of 18, Juliette, who is also with us, was rushed to A&E with severe haemorrhaging after a reaction to the contraceptive pill, and she has stage 4 endometriosis. Anne-Marie, who is also with us, was taken off the pill due to stroke risk and has described being housebound due to the gynaecological issues she has faced. Many of them describe managing complex hormonal challenges and, later in life, debilitating menopausal symptoms. That is a common experience for a lot of these women.

[Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

I thank the hon. Member for securing this really important debate. One of my constituents, who is a DES daughter, came to see me, and she reported that her mother’s health records were lost when her GP moved back in the 1970s. Does the hon. Member share my concern that a key issue here is that the lack of effective recordkeeping and the loss or destruction of records over time make it harder and harder to trace causal effects? Does she agree that we want to hear from the Minister what allowances will be made for this record-keeping issue in addressing the long-term impacts of DES on those daughters and grandchildren?

[Jessica Toale]

Of course. Recordkeeping is one of the issues we face as a campaign group. I know the Department of Health and Social Care is looking at that, and I will come on to that issue later in my remarks.

Limited studies have been done on DES sons, but they suggest that these men face an increased risk of genital abnormalities and infertility. In May 2026, Maxwell Samuda became the first man to speak out openly about the effects of the scandal on him and his family, and I pay tribute to him. There are serious, unresolved questions about the second and third generations—the grandchildren. That is important, because this is not history or a scandal of the past; it is live and a continuing injustice to these women and their families.

People affected by DES are still living with the consequences today. Some are discovering later in life that health problems they have endured for decades may be connected to a drug that their mother took and was prescribed before they were born. Those who suspect DES exposure often find that doctors, clinicians and the wider health system have little or no awareness of it. That really matters, because for too many DES survivors, the harm has been compounded by the disbelief that they face. They have been told that their symptoms are unrelated and not to worry. They have been sent away, ignored, dismissed or left to piece the evidence together for themselves. Anne-Marie, who is here today, said that she had to buy her own medical encyclopaedia just to find out what was wrong with her.

Sadly, that is part of a much wider pattern that we see in women’s health, which has been poorly understood for generations and continues to be poorly understood today. Women’s pain is too often minimised. Their symptoms are normalised or ignored. Reproductive health is often treated as something that is niche, too complicated, embarrassing or somehow secondary, and it is not given the seriousness that it deserves. Women are not listened to and their concerns are dismissed until the evidence is too impossible to ignore. The history and present experience of DES is part of that wider system and failure, and, even now, we do not have the systems in place to properly support those affected.

One of the most worrying examples of that is in screening. Current routine smear testing for cervical cancer is designed primarily to deal with and detect changes linked to HPV. It does not reliably detect clear cell adenocarcinoma—the rare cancer associated with DES exposure. That means many DES daughters may believe that they are being adequately screened, but in fact the very cancers for which they have an increased risk will not be picked up through the standard process. Crucially, they need access to advanced screening for a much longer span of years than most women do.

A truly heartbreaking experience of that was the experience of Charly, who is in the Gallery today. She is a DES daughter and was diagnosed with clear cell adenocarcinoma in her cervix and uterus at the age of eight; she was given a hysterectomy at the age of nine. We know that standard breast cancer screening does not pick things up and is not adequate for women who face DES exposure.

Many women bear not only the emotional burden of uncertainty because of DES, but a financial burden, self-funding annual scans as a precautionary measure and undertaking fertility treatments. Today, in the meeting with the Minister, Juliette described the range of tests she undergoes every year at large personal expense and the lack of fairness for people who cannot afford to do so. That is unacceptable, which is why targeted screening and specialist monitoring for those at risk is so important. People who are affected need accurate information, proper care, and the chance of early diagnosis.

When I first heard Jan’s story, I had to act, and as a nation, we have a unique responsibility to act.

[Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for the powerful speech she is making, and for her campaigning work on this really important issue. I recently met my constituent Susannah, who is a victim of the DES scandal. She spoke movingly about the impact it has had on her life—20 gruelling operations since she was a teenager, precious time with her friends and family lost and the shadow of a life-threatening illness, because of course as a DES sufferer, she is 40 times more likely to suffer from cervical cancer. Does my hon. Friend agree with Susannah and me that the Government should very carefully consider the merits of a full public inquiry into this scandal?

[Jessica Toale]

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. I have also met Susie—she is a doughty campaigner and a real tribute to the movement. I will come on to some of the calls of the DES Justice campaign shortly.

The reason I think we as a nation have a unique responsibility to act is that DES was developed here in the UK, using public money. I am just going to let that sink in for a minute. It was not patented, meaning that it could be used widely, and it was. Despite the evidence of harms, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency still has not shown us any evidence of when it officially advised against the use of DES.

In July last year, I co-ordinated a cross-party letter signed by 37 Members of Parliament, calling for recognition and an apology for those affected by DES. Since then, those affected have come together to establish the DES Justice campaign, and I pay tribute to all the brave men and women who have come forward to share their stories. I know how painful and personal this is, and I know that for many, speaking out means reliving a trauma that has shaped their whole life. I also want to acknowledge Clare Fletcher and the DES campaigners who have worked tirelessly for recognition, often with little support and against huge institutional silence, and I thank Sarah Corker and ITV News for their investigation, which helped bring the scandal to public attention and forced institutions to begin answering questions that were left unanswered for decades.

That co-ordinated campaigning has paid off. In September, the MHRA admitted that it had made inaccurate statements for up to 25 years about when DES was withdrawn in Britain and apologised. In November, the former Health Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting), acknowledged the suffering of DES-affected families and apologised. This was a huge step; it was the first time that many campaigners felt that the state had begun to recognise what had happened to them. That apology matters, but it cannot be the end of the matter, because for people like Jan—who has campaigned for more than 40 years—there must now be action.

The DES Justice campaign is calling for the Government to take five clear steps. The first of those steps is to commit to uncovering the truth about what happened, including through a full, judge-led statutory inquiry. The second is to support research into the long-term and intergenerational effects of DES; the third is to raise awareness of DES among NHS professionals; the fourth is to assess the feasibility of tracking and informing those potentially exposed to DES; and the fifth is to introduce targeted screening and monitoring for those at risk.

Those asks are reasonable, practical and necessary, because while some progress has been made, it remains nowhere near enough. We need updated and accurate information on the NHS website, so that people searching for DES are not left confused, frightened, or dependent on campaign groups for basic fasts. We need better information flows to GPs, gynaecologists, oncologists, fertility specialists and other NHS professionals. We need DES to be included in medical training and continuing professional development, so that clinicians know what it is, what the risks are, and how to support people who have been exposed. We need clear guidance on screening and monitoring, especially given the limitations of routine smear testing.

We also need a serious effort to understand whether and how those at risk can be identified, and those affected informed. I recognise that this is difficult—many of the records are old, and some have been lost or destroyed or were never kept properly. Some people will not know whether their mothers took DES, and some mothers may no longer be alive to be asked, but difficulty cannot be an excuse for inaction.

There are people who may be at risk today and do not know it. There are women who believe they are protected by the smear test, but they need specialist monitoring. There are families living with unexplained patterns of gynaecological problems—infertility, pregnancy loss or cancer—without even ever knowing that DES could be part of the picture.

--- Later in debate ---

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Mark Ferguson.)

[Jessica Toale]

There are mothers who carry and have carried unimaginable guilt—a guilt that should never have been theirs to bear. No mother should be made to feel responsible for trusting her doctor, no daughter should be left to feel that her suffering is inexplicable, and no family should be forced to campaign for decades simply to be believed.

I believe that DES is the greatest pharmaceutical scandal of our time, and one for which we owe victims justice and greater accountability. A drug developed using public money was prescribed to hundreds of thousands of women, with evidence of harm emerging while it continued to be used, and the consequences stretch across generations, yet most people have never heard of it. That is part of the injustice, too, and it must change.

I thank the Minister for meeting some of our DES Justice campaigners and their families today. Madam Deputy Speaker, thank you for dropping into our drop-in this afternoon. Will the Minister honour the calls of those campaigners for greater awareness among NHS professionals; better clinical guidance; more publicly available information; research; and targeted screening and support? Will the Government consider the case for a full statutory inquiry, so that the truth can finally be established?

Time is running out. Many DES mothers have already died. Many daughters are now later in life. Many campaigners have been fighting for decades to be heard. With every year that passes, more records disappear, more witnesses are lost and more families are left without answers. It is not too late to do the right thing, to acknowledge the scale of the failure and to improve care for those who were affected.

I close by paying tribute again to my constituent Jan, whose courage and determination brought this issue to my attention. She has kept campaigning not just for herself, but for every family affected by DES. I pay tribute to every DES mother, daughter, son and grandchild, and every family member who has fought for recognition. They deserve justice, and they deserve answers and to know what happened to them. They deserve to be supported by the very health system that failed them. If anyone listening to this debate thinks that they, their mother, their grandmother or someone they know may have been affected by DES, I urge them to seek further information from the DES Justice campaign or to contact my office. This Government have an opportunity to listen, to act and to begin putting right one of the greatest medical injustices of our time. I urge the Minister to take that opportunity today.

Health Bill

Jessica Toale Excerpts

2nd reading
Monday 1st June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Stuart Andrew (Daventry) (Con)]

I begin by welcoming the Secretary of State to his new post, and thank him for sharing his very personal story about what the NHS means to him. I look forward to our future exchanges, however long he is in post. I also pay tribute to the former Health Secretary, the right hon. Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting), with whom I have had a few moments across the Dispatch Box. I know that the NHS has also been very important to him personally. During my time in hospices, I saw the incredible work that the NHS does, and despite the politics that we may have—and I will be referring to the right hon. Gentleman a bit more later on—we all care deeply about the national health service and want the very best for it.

There are moments in politics when one almost has to admire the confidence of Governments—not their competence, necessarily, or their judgment, and sometimes not their timing, but certainly their confidence—and nowhere has that confidence been more magnificently displayed than in the presentation of the Health Bill. If one had listened carefully to the former Secretary of State for Health and Social Care over the past two years, one could conclude only that this Bill was not merely legislation, but apparently the parliamentary equivalent of the second coming. In every speech, interview and carefully staged hospital visit with sleeves rolled up, they delivered the same message: at last—at long last—the NHS was to be modernised, integrated, digitised, streamlined, revolutionised and transformed into a gleaming technological marvel, where patients floated frictionlessly through a system powered entirely by innovation, efficiency and ministerial self-belief.

I say gently to Ministers that whenever a politician begins using the phrase “once-in-a-generation change” on such a regular basis, it is usually wise to place one’s hands protectively over one’s wallet, given the sheer cost of what is to follow. What became increasingly striking was not simply the scale of the promises, but the sheer showmanship of them, with the former Health Secretary speaking less like a Cabinet Minister wrestling with one of the most complex public services in the world and more like a man auditioning to narrate the trailer for his own leadership campaign documentary. And now, Madam Deputy Speaker, we arrive at the great political twist: the man who spent two years announcing the future has departed before the delivery date arrived, like an architect unveiling magnificent blueprints before quietly moving abroad just before construction begins.

Into this situation walks the new Health Secretary. Members can imagine the scene: the Prime Minister sits stubbornly in No. 10, grinning with all the reassuring confidence of a man standing knee-deep in a flooded rowing boat insisting that the situation merely requires a modest redistribution of water. Into this bunker is summoned the new Secretary of State—formerly the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, the very man who helped to allocate the famous £202 billion funding settlement now repeatedly cited as proof that every problem in British healthcare has theoretically already been solved.

[Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)]

I would not give the right hon. Gentleman’s political adviser a raise for their speechwriting abilities just yet. Why does he think we are having to talk about once-in-a-generation change to the NHS?

[Stuart Andrew]

I would point the hon. Lady to how the NHS was being run in Wales—it certainly was not the great success that she is trying to allude to.

In politics there are difficult jobs and there are impossible jobs, and then there is inheriting a Department after one’s predecessor spent two years promising the electorate that this is the one Bill to rule all Bills and fix virtually everything short of death itself. This was not just a hospital pass, but a hospital pass delivered by catapult.

One can almost hear the poor Secretary of State gulping. “Thank you, Prime Minister,” he replies faintly, in the tone of a man accepting command of the Titanic after it has already struck the iceberg. Off he trudges to the Department of Health and Social Care, where the automatic doors open and his nostrils are struck immediately by a strange, lingering aroma. It is not the scent of modernisation or the smell of efficiency, and it is certainly not the fragrance of falling waiting lists. No—it is the unmistakeable odour of political panic, mixed delicately with the perspiration of failed leadership manoeuvres and lightly seasoned with the ashes of abandoned promises. There waiting for him, naturally, is Sir Humphrey—because however much Governments modernise, digitise, integrate, recalibrate or synergise, Whitehall always produces a Sir Humphrey.

I can imagine the conversation. The new Secretary of State says brightly, “Good news, Sir Humphrey. I understand that my predecessor has already solved everything through the Health Bill.” At this point, an eerie silence descends. Civil servants suddenly become more fascinated by ceiling tiles, and one junior official attempts to escape through a stationery cupboard. Sir Humphrey clears his throat in the way only permanent secretaries can; a sound rather like an early—

--- Later in debate ---

[Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)]

In his opening remarks, the Health Secretary set out our record in office on waiting times, patient experience and investment. My local area has benefited from this record level of investment. The BEACH—births, emergency and critical care, children’s health—building at Bournemouth hospital opened in March 2025, improving maternity, children’s and emergency care services. Poole hospital will this year become the largest planned care hospital in the country.

Over the past month, I have been to the opening of two new mental health facilities, representing a £70 million investment in the local area. One of them, the Seastone building, is a high-intensity unit for young people, the first of its kind in our region, and it will stop young people from being sent to Manchester or Newcastle from Dorset or the south-west. I am particularly proud of the commitment to get Winton health centre back open, and we have now secured £1.3 million in investment to do that. It will open in the summer and will bring care closer to my community and alleviate pressure on our local GPs.

I have not met a person in the health system, in education or in the community who does not agree with the NHS 10-year plan’s ambition to move the health system from treatment to prevention and to get more care into the community. The Bill helps us to get closer to delivering this ambition for all people. I want to talk in particular about three often vulnerable communities. My hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) spoke eloquently about the experience of children with SEND and their parents, so I ask the Minister to reflect on how the Bill helps with joined-up services and access to specialist care for those young people.

HealthBus, a local charity that I support, brings direct nurse-led care to people experiencing homelessness. Their core ask has been to have access to system 1 records and local NHS historical records to better help their patients. I am grateful to the civil servants who have been helping them to date, but I ask that particular attention is paid to ensuring that the single patient record is rolled out to benefit communities who struggle to engage and get support from existing structures.

We must support our elderly population to get the care they need. I met staff at Lewis-Manning hospice care this week. They have done an incredible amount of work on the number of hospital admissions that people have in their last 12 years of life. They are proposing hospice at home hubs to ensure that up-front investment can help people to spend their last days in dignity. Will the Minister provide reassurance that any frontline services that become available are put into end-of-life care as well?

Finally, when this Labour Government came into office, the fundamental promise of the NHS, that it would be there for us when we need it, had been broken by decades of under-investment, by bureaucracy and by ditching reforms that had been made under the last Labour Government. I am proud of the progress to date, and I support the Bill to improve the patient experience, to put more resources into frontline services and to deliver our NHS 10-year plan, getting care closer to the communities who need it.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

Women’s Health Strategy

Jessica Toale Excerpts

Thursday 16th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Karin Smyth]

I thank my hon. Friend for her question. The document contains a long list of actions, with clear dates alongside them, so that she and others—including her constituents—can see what we are saying, and can measure progress.

[Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)]

Ignored, humiliated and misdiagnosed—these are the experiences of far too many women, and far too often, those experiences have tragic consequences. There is no more depressing example of this than the women who were prescribed the banned anti-miscarriage drug diethylstilbestrol, or DES, and the struggle that they, their children and their grandchildren have had in accessing the care and support that they need and deserve. I welcome the steps this Government have taken to improve women’s health outcomes. Will the Minister consider meeting DES campaigners to ensure that their voices and experiences are part of this strategy?

[Karin Smyth]

As we know, and as is documented in the strategy, there is sadly a long list of issues that particularly affect women that have been ignored, and it has taken far too long for women to draw attention to those issues. I understand that my hon. Friend the Minister for patient safety has met DES campaigners, and we will continue to listen to and learn from their experiences as we develop the strategy.

Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill

Jessica Toale Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 27th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)]

This Bill matters enormously in my constituency. The NHS is one of the largest local employers. Our hospitals, community services and care settings are the backbone of our local economy. We also have outstanding institutions—Bournemouth University, Bournemouth and Poole College and the Health Sciences University—ready and willing to provide a strong local pipeline of medical and health professionals. I have met professors at the school of midwifery at BU worried about whether its graduates will get a first placement, specialist nurses unable to progress their careers, and early-career psychiatrists forced to look for work far from home. That is not through a lack of demand for these services in the local area. If we train doctors here, fund their education through British taxpayers and ask them to commit their lives and careers to the NHS, we owe them a fair chance to build those careers within it.

The shadow Health Secretary, the right hon. Member for Daventry (Stuart Andrew), has said that we should not play politics with people’s jobs. I agree, but we must recognise that the situation we are in now is a direct result of the Conservatives’ ill thought-through visa changes in the wake of the mess left by their post-Brexit settlement for the UK. The fact that we now have more than double the number of overseas-trained applicants than UK-trained applicants for a limited position is a consequence of that. Under the Conservatives, we became too reliant on pulling the immigration lever to solve our workforce shortages. Their policies meant that UK graduates are being squeezed out, with too many lost to the private sector or overseas not because of a lack of talent or commitment, but because the system did not work for them. I was proud to campaign on a commitment to train more local young people and to encourage companies to hire locally before looking overseas, and the same should be true for the NHS, so I am pleased that the Bill is doing that.

This is not about blaming or disrespecting migrant workers. International doctors and those from our immigrant communities who work in all elements of our NHS are valued and respected. Immigration has enriched my town. The people who have come to the UK to care for our elderly, nurse our sick and heal our injured are important parts of the vibrant and diverse community that we have in Bournemouth, and I thank them for their service.

We should also be proud that the NHS is a world-renowned employer and a real part of our soft power influence. Countries around the world aspire to the type of universal healthcare offering that we have in the UK, and our specialists train health professionals around the world. For many doctors around the globe, time spent working in the NHS is a badge of honour, but poaching doctors from countries that desperately need them while UK-trained doctors cannot progress is morally wrong. It undermines global health equity and erodes trust here at home. It is right that we prioritise skilling our own people; other countries recognise that reality. The United States, Canada and Australia prioritise domestic graduates for training opportunities.

The Bill is consequential for me, as a Labour MP for a constituency that has never voted Labour before. Bournemouth and Poole are often seen as affluent areas, but they contain real inequalities and serious barriers to social mobility. In places such as West Howe and Alderney, parents tell me that they feel forgotten. They worry that their children do the right things, work hard and get the right grades, but are constantly told that they cannot compete or are locked out. If we want young people from council estates to believe that they belong in medicine, we must back that belief with opportunity. We cannot claim to be the party of social mobility and dignity in work if we do not put the ladders in place.

The Conservative record is clear: expanding medical places without expanding training posts, liberalising visas without the workforce planning and leaving UK graduates to carry the cost. The Bill is a necessary correction. It is fair, responsible and morally right for our NHS, communities and the next generation. To any students or recent graduates considering Australia, I say this: if we get this right, we have beaches that are just as impressive in Bournemouth, even if I cannot always guarantee the weather.

Budget Resolutions

Jessica Toale Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)]

Although he is not in his place, I thank my right hon. Friend the Health Secretary for the investment in local hospitals, the 11 GPs across Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole, the 13,000 emergency dental appointments that we have had across Dorset, and the £1.3 million that my constituency of Bournemouth West has received to reopen the Winton health centre, which closed under the last Government. This is the difference that a Government who prioritise investment can make.

Before I was elected, I met a couple whom I will never forget. He was a refuse collector for the local authority who was at risk of being fired and rehired on less pay, and with less job security, for the very same job that he had been doing for a decade. She was a teacher at an independent school, and they had two young children in our primary schools. They told me with absolute honesty what it felt like for them—the cost of food rising, energy bills creeping higher, the dread of their fixed-term mortgage coming to an end, and not having the time or money that they could use to treat their children. They were doing everything that society asks of them—working hard, raising children and contributing to their communities—yet they felt that they were slipping backwards.

Let me enlighten any hon. Member who asks, “How is that family better off under this Budget?”, because they are at the forefront of my mind. They will be better off because of the £150 cut to their energy bills, because of the freeze on fuel duty, prescription charges and rail fares, because of the bus service subsidies that we are maintaining, and because the national living wage has been raised. In fact, wages have gone up more in one year under this Government than they went up in the previous decade under the Conservatives. Interest rates have come down five times, which will help with the family’s mortgage. Inflation will be down because of this Budget, and these changes come alongside major investments in our energy infrastructure.

Last week I visited a school that is one of the first to have public investment in solar panels, which will save it £8,500 a year. For our roads, my local authority is getting £38 million, double what it got last year. There is investment in our NHS and cultural values. No Budget sits in isolation. This Budget comes alongside a wider programme, including a new EU-UK deal to stabilise prices and support jobs, renters’ rights and employment rights, extending free school meals and free breakfast clubs, and reforming the planning system, along with investment in house building, to deliver the affordable homes that we so desperately need.

Why have we focused so much in this Budget on cutting the cost of living? Because when households feel pressure, our whole economy feels it: local hospitality businesses have fewer customers, bus companies have fewer passengers, and our creative venues suffer when families can no longer justify the cost of tickets. As we have heard so powerfully, poverty also has a knock-on effect on children’s ability to learn, their behaviour, their health and their life chances. Some 2,000 children in my constituency will benefit from the removal of the two-child limit. Tackling the cost of living is an investment in people, their quality of life and their opportunity to contribute to our communities and economy.

--- Later in debate ---

[Richard Fuller]

The hon. Lady needs to recognise that people are struggling because of decisions made by this Government.

The people do want better public services, but they do not understand why, after the Government handed out a 15% pay hike to train drivers, more trains are running late this year compared to last year. People are striving to make ends meet as prices rise, perhaps putting a little aside to create a better future for their children, and they say that this Budget will make their lives worse, not better. The verdict is in: by more than two to one, the public think that this Budget is unfair, and only 2% think it will make them better off. They are right.

This Budget attacks the strivers in our society—the engines of our economic growth. It confirms the devastating attack on family farms when we need greater food security, increases taxes on dividends when we need to encourage risk taking, discourages saving for retirement, and widens the division between pension protections for public sector and private sector employees. It deals a blow to start-up businesses that want to share their success with their employees, and raises taxes on working people, breaking the Labour party’s own manifesto promise.

This Budget makes it clear that the Labour Government do not believe in personal responsibility, do not understand the spirit of enterprise, will punish aspiration and are too weak to make the hard choices that our economy so desperately needs if it is to get back on the right track.

[Jessica Toale]

I am sure that the Chancellor appreciates the hon. Gentleman’s input into the Budget, given that the public roundly rejected your approach to our economy just a year and a half ago.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

Order. The terms “you” and “yours” should not be used, and interventions need to be short, so quickly get to the point.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jessica Toale]

Will the hon. Gentleman reflect on the OBR saying that a decade of austerity and the impact of Brexit have had a much more pernicious effect on productivity than we believed before?

[Richard Fuller]

Perhaps the hon. Lady would like to reflect on the fact that, when she stands in the next election, real household incomes will have gone up by just a quarter of the rate they went up by under 10 years of Conservative government.

If we are to fund the defence of our nation against greater threats, enable young people to have the same security in their retirement as pensioners have today, and maintain public services, we have to create wealth. This Government offer no hope of wealth creation, but the Conservative party does. A society that encourages people to succeed and take the risks that underpin success; a society that expands individual freedom and the scope for personal responsibility; a society that is prepared to make sacrifices to make the lives of our children and grandchildren a little better—we will build that wealth-creating society by bringing down energy costs, cutting spending, cutting taxes, backing business and getting Britain working again.

Women and Girls with Autism: Mental Health Support

Jessica Toale Excerpts

Tuesday 15th July 2025 Westminster Hall

[Sir Edward Leigh (in the Chair)]

I will call Jessica Toale to move the motion and then call the Minister to respond. I remind other Members that they may make a speech only with prior permission from the Member in charge of the debate and the Minister. As is the convention for 30-minute debates, there will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up.

[Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered mental health support for women and girls with autism.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Edward. I am grateful to have secured this debate today to discuss a matter of deep importance for one of my Bournemouth West constituents, Lindsey Bridges, as well as the thousands of families across the country affected by the failings in our mental health and autism care system. I rise today not only as a Member of Parliament, but as a voice for Lindsey and her daughter Lauren, known as Lolly to her friends and family, who is no longer here to speak for herself.

Lauren was just 16 when she died. She was a bright, compassionate young woman, and a straight A student who dreamed of being a doctor or a paediatric nurse. She was also autistic, and like many girls and young women with autism, she faced serious challenges getting the support she needed. In 2021, Lauren was detained under the Mental Health Act 1983. She was placed in an in-patient unit in Manchester six hours from her home in Bournemouth. As a result, her mental health deteriorated severely. In February 2022, Lauren went into cardiac arrest and died in that unit. Her mother Lindsey had begged for her to be moved closer to home, but her pleas went unheeded. This is not an isolated incident. Like too many others, she was let down by a system that promised care but failed in that promise.

[Andrew Cooper (Mid Cheshire) (Lab)]

My heart absolutely breaks hearing the story about Lauren—it is awful. Many autistic women and girls are undiagnosed, misdiagnosed or diagnosed late in life due to the outdated belief that autism mainly affects males. As a result, many women receive mental health treatments for conditions they do not have, including treatments that could be ineffective or even harmful. These diagnostic failures can seriously affect mental wellbeing and may explain high rates of depression in that group. Does my hon. Friend agree that the healthcare system must adapt to better identify and support autistic women and girls early on, prevent misdiagnosis and improve mental health outcomes?

[Jessica Toale]

Absolutely. There are now more than 2,000 people with learning disabilities and/or autism detained across the UK in in-patient units similar to the one that Lauren was held in. They are often far from home, cut off from their families and placed in highly restrictive environments that frequently do more harm than good. Lauren’s case is heartbreaking, but it must also be a turning point, which is why Lindsey is campaigning for Lolly’s law and why I am bringing this campaign to the House today.

Lolly’s law proposes four urgent reforms that could prevent future tragedies. The first is mandatory retraining for psychiatric professionals and support staff so that they have a proper understanding of how autism presents in girls and women. Too often those young women are misdiagnosed with personality disorders or wrongly pathologised.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Lady for securing this debate. She is absolutely right to highlight the issue. It is very hard to listen to because the particular circumstances are so personal. Numerous studies have shown that girls and women are more likely to internalise the stress and anxieties that come with autism, whereas boys are likely to be more openly tempered or passive-aggressive. That is a statement rather than an observation. Does the hon. Lady agree that we could work more closely with teachers in schools and other individuals to ensure that young girls struggling with autism have support in the educational system to externalise some of their stress?

[Jessica Toale]

It is obvious that women tend to mask symptoms of autism more and that they present very differently from men. Our medical system is not set up to properly diagnose it in women.

The second proposal of Lolly’s law is a reassessment of personality disorder diagnoses where autism might be missed. There needs to be a national reassessment programme to identify cases of misdiagnosis and provide appropriate support for those affected. The evidence already shows that where female in-patients are diagnosed with emotionally unstable personality disorder and/or eating disorders and are reassessed for autism, 100% of them receive a diagnosis for autism.

Thirdly, specialist suicide prevention and self-harm teams must be available in all mental health units for vulnerable young people. These should be multidisciplinary teams trained specifically in females with autism. Finally, anti-ligature doors and safety infrastructure must be mandated across all in-patient mental health facilities. These are basic safeguards that can and do save lives.

Lindsey has set up a petition for Lolly’s law, which has already gathered 225,000 signatures—clear proof of the public demand for action. She has also developed a training course for child and adolescent mental health services professionals, solicitors and others involved in mental health decision making, which has been positively received by those who have seen it.

[Afzal Khan (Manchester Rusholme) (Lab)]

We understand that girls with autism are more likely to be underdiagnosed or misdiagnosed. Without appropriate and tailored support, those girls can face unnecessary distress, particularly in the school setting. Does my hon. Friend agree that we should ensure teachers and other professionals are given the correct training to better understand autism?

[Jessica Toale]

Clearly, we need better training across many of our institutional settings. This is in part where Lindsey has put together the training course, which I hope she will be able to discuss with the Minister at some point. Lindsey is also backed by the Children and Young People’s Mental Health Coalition, Emotional Dysregulation Autism, the Abbey clinic and many other respected voices in this space.

Let me be frank. The current system is failing young people with autism. The number of people in long-term institutional care remains stubbornly high. It fails to distinguish between autism and other mental health illnesses. It overuses restraint and seclusion and separates children from their families, often for extended periods. It is a system that punishes difference rather than supports it. It is indefensible. Families are exhausted. Parents like Lindsey are forced into campaigning roles they never asked for, because they have been let down so completely by the very institutions meant to protect their children.

[Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)]

One of the toughest challenges that autistic women and girls face is misdiagnosis and late diagnosis, so girls’ problems go unnoticed. Parents in my constituency frequently tell me how frustrating and exhausting it is for them and their families to try to get the support and diagnosis that their daughters need. Does my hon. Friend agree that too often young women get a late diagnosis and are left wondering how life could have been so much different if they had got that support earlier?

[Jessica Toale]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. There are far too many families across the country left fighting for their children and, like Lindsey, having to take up campaigning roles, which are clearly exhausting.

Will the Minister and the Government back Lolly’s law and commit to a formal review of autism diagnosis pathways for girls and women, with particular attention paid to those currently diagnosed with personality disorders? Will the Department of Health and Social Care mandate anti-ligature safety standards across all NHS and private health in-patient units, and develop specialist suicide and self-harm prevention teams in children’s in-patient care? If not, will the Minister consider piloting some of those schemes? Will she agree to meet Lindsey Bridges, hear her proposals directly and consider supporting the formal introduction of Lolly’s law as part of a broader strategy to transform in-patient care? Finally, will the Government review the current use of out-of-area placements and set targets for their reduction?

Lolly’s law is not radical; it is responsible. It is about safeguarding and justice for those families. It is about listening, learning and delivering reform, so that nobody is failed again like this and no more lives are lost. It is within our power to build a system where care means connection, not containment, and one that understands autism rather than punishes or isolates those living with it. It would be a system where families are partners in care, not visitors trying to navigate a maze of red tape, and where features such as anti-ligature doors are not considered nice to have but essential.

Lindsey’s courage in the face of unimaginable loss is truly moving. I am here to stand beside her in calls for change. Lauren should still be here and we owe it to her and every young person like her to build a system that sees, supports and safeguards every child, not just in words but in actions.

World Asthma Day

Jessica Toale Excerpts

Thursday 15th May 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Huq. I congratulate the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for bringing forward this debate to mark World Asthma Day.

There are two reasons why I wanted to speak in this debate. The first is personal: I developed asthma as a child, almost certainly as a result of the pollution of the Milan of the early 1990s, and living down the road from the Alfa Romeo factory. While the condition improved for me, unfortunately my younger sister suffered severely with it and continues to suffer today.

The second reason reflects the changes that my constituency has faced. Bournemouth was founded as a wellness resort, and back in the day visitors would come to take the air. In fact, one of our most famous residents, Sir Merton Russell-Cotes, who went on to become mayor and own the Royal Bath hotel, was sent to the south coast of England because he had chronic respiratory conditions, and ended up living in Bournemouth. It is still a place where people move to improve their quality of life and to live a healthier life—but Bournemouth was recently ranked as the 14th worst location in the UK for air quality. A staggering 83% of residents with lung conditions in my constituency say that poor air quality has made their conditions worse.

The hon. Member for Strangford has already pointed out that respiratory deaths are strongly linked to deprivation, more so than any other condition, and people living in the poorest areas of the UK are three times more likely to die from asthma than those in the wealthiest. That national injustice is reflected starkly in my constituency, where areas in the less affluent north, such as Alderney, West Howe, Kinson and Branksome, have asthma rates significantly higher than the national and regional averages.

If we are serious about improving outcomes for people with asthma, we must take a cross-departmental and holistic approach—one that addresses not just healthcare, but pollution, housing, transport and lifestyle. That is why I welcome the Environment Secretary’s commitment to improve air quality across the country, including in Bournemouth West; cleaner air saves lives and it must remain a top priority.

I welcome the Government’s broader efforts to tackle the root causes of respiratory illness: cutting emissions and improving public access to air quality information; the Tobacco and Vapes Bill and the Government’s ambition to create a smoke-free generation; and key legislation such as the Renters Rights’ Bill—specifically the inclusion of Awaab’s law, which is vital for my constituents. I am regularly contacted by residents, who are living in substandard conditions, plagued by mould and damp. These environmental hazards are not just unsightly, but dangerous. Mould is a known trigger for asthma and other respiratory conditions. With a clear link between asthma and deprivation, improving housing standards is a matter of not just fairness, but health.

Our national health service is in need of fundamental reform. We must move away from a system that reacts to ill health towards one that prevents it. I support the Government’s vision to shift more care into the community and tackle the backlog in treatment. In Bournemouth West, the challenges are particularly acute: 32% of respiratory patients are not seen within the 18-week NHS target and, worryingly, 60% of people diagnosed with asthma are not receiving even the most basic asthma care. Those outcomes place us among the worst-performing areas in the south-west. Meanwhile, over 90% of COPD patients in Dorset are not receiving the standard of care—the worst figure in the south of England.

We must end the postcode lottery in NHS services. Access to care should not depend on where someone lives. Is the Department aware of the issues facing my constituents in Bournemouth and people across Dorset? What can be done to improve access to healthcare for people with respiratory conditions in my area?

As the Health Secretary develops the NHS 10-year plan, I also urge the Minister to seriously consider the proposals set out by Asthma and Lung UK, which include: establishing national targets to reduce preventable asthma deaths, improving access to biologic medicines, supporting the use of digital monitoring tools and reviewing funding for asthma research.

In the spirit of World Asthma Day, let us recommit to ensuring that no one dies from preventable asthma attacks and ensure that every person, regardless of postcode or background, can access the care, medicine and environment they need to breathe freely.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jessica Toale Excerpts

Tuesday 6th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Karin Smyth]

I know the Liberal Democrat spokesperson follows this issue very closely in her own local community. As she knows, we are committed to ensuring that the recommendations of the reviews are fully implemented as part of that three-year plan, but I gently say to her that the Liberal Democrat party has consistently opposed the extra £26 billion that this Government raised to support the wider health service. Without that extra funding and the decisions that the Chancellor has made, we would not be able to make the progress that we are now starting to see.

[Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)]

2. What steps he is taking to shift care from hospitals into the community.

[Jo Platt (Leigh and Atherton) (Lab/Co-op)]

14. What steps he is taking to shift care from hospitals into the community.

[The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Wes Streeting)]

Despite my best efforts, may I welcome the hon. Member for Runcorn and Helsby (Sarah Pochin) to her place? Being a Member of Parliament is a privilege, and I know how special it is to sit on these Benches having been sent here by constituents. Regardless of our political differences, I wish her well personally.

As part of our 10-year plan for health, we want to deliver a real shift in the centre of gravity in the NHS, so that people get more care closer to home and, indeed, in their home, too. The NHS is as much a neighbourhood health service as a national health service. We have already made progress in shifting care to the community: providing more than £889 million in funding for GPs; agreeing the GP contract for the first time since the pandemic; and recruiting more than 1,500 GPs on to the frontline. Our 10-year plan will set out how we will continue to transform the NHS into a neighbourhood health service.

[Jessica Toale]

I am deeply concerned about the quality of healthcare for people experiencing homelessness in my constituency of Bournemouth West. HealthBus, a local charity, is doing great work in getting out into the community to treat people where they are and to prevent them from having to go into hospital, but it is not getting the funding that it needs and has discovered serious discrepancies in the way that the local integrated care board commissions services, particularly in relation to health inequalities. Can the Secretary of State tell me how this Government are prioritising health outcomes for people experiencing homelessness, and will he meet me and HealthBus to discuss how we can support its important work?

[Wes Streeting]

The founding mission of the NHS was to be there for people whenever they fall ill, so that they never have to worry about the bill. Unfortunately, thanks to the disaster and the failures of 14 years of Conservative Government, too many people in our country today experience the fear that Nye Bevan sought to eradicate. As my hon. Friend would expect, tackling health inequalities for homeless people and other vulnerable groups is central to the values of this Labour Government. Those values will be reflected in our 10-year plan for health. I would be delighted to hear from her further on what we can do to improve services in her area.

NHS: Independent Investigation

Jessica Toale Excerpts

Thursday 12th September 2024 Commons Chamber

[Wes Streeting]

I am delighted to see my hon. Friend representing Calder Valley. He has captured the fear and anxiety about the length of the wait experienced by far too many parents when they access A&E departments. It is a terrifying experience, particularly for parents with small children, to be in that situation. Frankly, the lack of focus on paediatric waiting lists and waiting times, whether in A&E or for electives, really is shameful. We have got to put children first and that is exactly what this Government will do.

[Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)]

My constituents in Bournemouth West have faced rising NHS waiting times; we have GP surgeries closing despite rising populations and health burdens; there are no dentists accepting any NHS adult patients and residents are being told to go to Southampton; and the junior doctors and nurses I meet are devastated that they cannot deliver the quality of service that they want to. Does the Secretary of State agree that although the road ahead is long, Lord Darzi’s frank and raw assessment is the first step to recovery under a Labour Government?

[Wes Streeting]

I am delighted to see my hon. Friend in her place representing the people of Bournemouth. The great thing about where we are at this moment is that, for the first time in a long time, there is a feeling of hope and optimism about what the future could be. We are determined to build on that and give staff and patients the confidence of knowing that the best days for the NHS lie ahead.