(3 days, 19 hours ago)
Commons ChamberI wish to thank my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline and Dollar (Graeme Downie) for securing this debate, which has been incredibly powerful and impactful. I also wish to thank the hon. Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) for sharing that incredibly powerful and emotional story of Jagdeep’s journey. I am sure that is something that will remain with many of us today.
I also thank my constituents who wrote to me to share their personal stories. It is often not easy to reach out to someone whom we do not know and whom we have never met before and share the most painful aspects of our life. Like my hon. Friends, I was shocked and surprised to hear that Parkinson’s has never been fully debated in this Chamber—in 2017, there was an Adjournment debate on young-onset Parkinson’s—but we are righting that record today.
Across the UK, 153,000 people are living with Parkinson’s, more than 13,000 of whom are in Scotland. The condition often comes with a range of complex conditions, as we have heard, affecting speech, mobility and sleep. Some 30% of those living with Parkinson’s also have dementia, which greatly impacts their care needs, yet far too many go without any information on the support services that are available after their diagnosis. Both those with Parkinson’s and their caregivers experience a long and complex care journey, which all too often isolates them from society. We have already heard today about the significant and harrowing impact that that can have on mental health. The experience of Parkinson’s disease is heartbreaking for us to hear about today, but it is even more difficult for those who have to deal with it and live with it, day in and day out.
When I think of Parkinson’s, I recall someone whom I once knew many years ago. His road to diagnosis was long. He was a young man, a bowler, and was at the heart of his club both on the green and in the clubhouse. But it became clear that something was very wrong as he started to stumble and struggle to walk. That often led to hushed whispers of concern as to what could possibly be wrong in someone so young. He was unaware of what was causing the changes to his body, impacting his mobility and co-ordination and, as a result, participation in the sport and the sporting community that he loved. These were in fact the early signs of young-onset Parkinson’s, the symptoms of which can easily be misattributed to other illnesses.
Young-onset Parkinson’s impacts one in 20 of those living with the condition. I saw at first hand how a lack of awareness of Parkinson’s symptoms and young-onset Parkinson’s can cause anxiety, confusion and distress and can result in delay in seeking help. This just highlights how important it is to have well-funded and comprehensive medical and community support for those living with Parkinson’s, but, unfortunately, these stories are not unique. From constituents emailing us with their worries and personal stories from friends and family, we each know how devastating this disease can be.
Across Scotland, the situation is dire. The waiting times for diagnosis are deeply distressing, and over half of Parkinson’s patients in the Borders, Ayrshire and Arran experience waits of over 48 weeks. In my constituency, covered by Forth Valley NHS board and NHS Lothian, wait times can be as long as 24 weeks for more than a quarter of patients. These waiting lists lead to delayed diagnoses, leaving many people struggling alone and without help. The symptoms can be frightening, and demand dedicated support. It is imperative that the Scottish Government get a shift on. They need to use the record-breaking settlement from this Government to start to tackle those wait times, bring clarity to people at a time of great uncertainty and deliver the support that they need, because the condition goes beyond the physical.
I welcome this Government’s investment to bring down neurology waiting lists to speed-up diagnosis times, but we cannot rest on our laurels because there is too much work to be done. By investing in research, improving healthcare access and fostering a supportive community, we can offer hope and improve the quality of life for many. As MPs, MSPs, and local representatives, it is our duty to ensure that those living with Parkinson’s disease and their families have access to the best possible care and support. We must recognise that key milestones have been achieved by campaigners and research scientists to alleviate the pain and isolation caused by the condition. We must continue to raise awareness about Parkinson’s disease, reduce the stigma and ensure that those affected feel heard, understood, and supported. The public awareness raised in recent years is so important to those facing years ahead with this disease. They must know that they are not alone and where they can access help.
I would like to share my gratitude for and commend the work of Parkinson’s UK, which has been invaluable. We have heard much today about its fantastic work across the country. I would also like to recognise the advocacy of Billy Connolly and his bravery and honesty in talking about his diagnosis and his life with Parkinson’s. He has shown his characteristic ability to broach even the darkest of subjects with humour, and he has that cut-through that can often be very difficult for some of us politicians to achieve. He has sparked a much-needed conversation.
Thanks to the event recently organised by my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline and Dollar, I had the pleasure and privilege of meeting Dave Clark, former TV sports presenter and fierce advocate and successful fundraiser for Parkinson’s UK. He took the time to speak to me about the unpredictability of his condition and how it can change on a daily basis. We need to take these personal testimonies into account when considering any changes to the welfare system. Dave’s experience reinforces the points we have heard today.
Finally, I am glad that this debate could take place in the Chamber, as the centre of our democracy. In this House is where support for those living with Parkinson’s must be the loudest.
(3 months ago)
Commons ChamberUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I am not entirely clear what the hon. Member is referring to. I have been clear that we are committed to the women’s health strategy, and we will take it forward as part of the 10-year plan. Most of the—[Interruption.] If it was about the women’s health hubs, they are mainly there but in different forms and with different levels of services. We want to ensure that the systems reflect their local population needs. That is an entirely proper way to go about things.
As I said, unusually, we think that many of the hubs, which were rolled out as pilots under the previous Administration, are doing a good job in most areas—although not everywhere, so we want to learn from the pilots. Our commitment is absolutely to women. That is why gynaecology waiting lists are particularly targeted: we had 600,000 women on them. Women should feel really assured about the support that the Government are giving them and their health, to prioritise their health. We are keen to learn more about women’s health hubs. They will be different in different places because they have different populations, and that is entirely in keeping with the direction of travel of the Government.
I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) for her work in raising the serious health inequalities that women across the UK face every single day. Does the Minister agree that we need more expertise in women’s health issues in primary care settings to ensure early diagnosis and that women get the treatment they need at the earliest point?
My hon. Friend makes an excellent point about both the work of the Chair of the Select Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen), and the importance of primary and community care recognising, listening to and supporting women through women’s health, as well as making sure that our knowledge and good practice is spread across the team. This is an area where different systems have women’s health hubs using different teams and different technology, and they have different links to secondary care colleagues and specialist colleagues. By listening to each other and working together, they are so good at spreading some of that good practice.
(3 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberI congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) on securing what has been a powerful and impactful debate. It has reflected the personal experiences and relationship that people have with food, which can be complex.
My interest in this subject started as a councillor in West Lothian, when I became acutely aware of the growing financial pressures that have left people really struggling to put food on the table. My experiences with constituents experiencing hardship led me to champion the Co-operative party’s “Food Justice” campaign and initiate the set-up of the West Lothian Food Network. The network, which consists of local third sector and community groups, has evolved over the years. Initially set up just days before lockdown, it ended up providing emergency food support to those in financial hardship and experiencing social isolation during the pandemic. Today, the network is a 21-member organisation that addresses inequalities and supports those on low incomes, from rural areas and from disadvantaged groups who are at risk of poor health outcomes because of food insecurity. I put on the record my thanks to all the staff and volunteers from those organisations that have played a part in the network over the years, including West Lothian food bank. I also thank the team at Bo’ness Storehouse, which supports my constituents in that area.
With the increasing obesity gap between the most and least deprived, health inequalities are also on the rise. The reality in Scotland is startling. As we have already heard, two thirds of all adults are overweight, and a third of children start primary school at risk of being overweight. One in six Scots is on a waiting list, and there is no doubt that many will be there due to obesity and diet-related health complaints, with many more on long-term medication for conditions such as high blood pressure, osteoarthritis and type 2 diabetes.
The damage of unhealthy food does not fall evenly across the country. The vast majority of billboards for junk food advertising are targeted towards the most income-deprived communities, and fast-food outlets make up a significantly higher proportion of local food options. Again, that is something I heard time and again as a councillor. Many communities were crying out for fresh fruit and veg shops, but all they saw were more fast-food outlets opening. It has become worryingly common that communities that have the least do not have access to choice when it comes to where they shop. We have heard about food deserts. Limited transportation options further compound the problem. If someone does not drive and they live in an area that is ill-served by bus or train routes, the foods that are more likely to be on offer to them will be highly processed with less nutritional value, higher in salt, fat and sugar, and often more expensive.
The underlying pressures on time, local infrastructure and earnings impact on the freedom to choose and the ability to lead healthier lives. I am very grateful for organisations such as the Whitburn Community Development Trust and the West Lothian Foodbank, which have community gardens and take the produce from the gardens and put them directly into their pantries to support people to access nutritious, healthy food. But if you live in an area where there is no such group or community garden, and if you are struggling financially to put food on the table and you have no way to make it to a lower-cost supermarket that does have healthier options, can we really say that you have a choice?
Adults on low incomes are more than twice as likely to have diets that are high in sugar, saturated fats and salts, and low in fibre, fruit, vegetables and fish. We know that a weaker diet from a young age is detrimental to long-term development and health. That impact can be seen in our hospitals, where, as we heard, tooth decay is the most common reason for the admission of children. Lack of access to local dentists is an issue I raised at Prime Minister’s questions last week. In Scotland, we have the shameful statistic that one in four children are starting school with tooth decay.
The cost is personal and societal. The human cost of obesity can be measured in increasingly impaired mobility, slower recovery from illness and earlier physical decline. Last year, Diabetes UK reported that in Scotland the number of cases of people under 40 living with type 2 diabetes rose by almost a third between 2016 and 2022. In 2023, Frontier Economics estimated that the total economic impact of obesity in the UK is £98 billion, including costs to the NHS and social care, lost productivity, workforce inactivity and welfare payments. Diabetes care alone accounts for nearly 10% of the NHS budget. The scale of the pressure demands urgency in how we respond. The impact on the economy can be measured in lost productivity, but most importantly it reflects a really worrying trend: the shrinking working population, greater social isolation and the rise in the number of people with complex health needs.
Policy often talks of the last mile, the final few yards, to get support over the line and accessible to those who need it most. In my view, that must be the first and most essential mile. There are national changes that we can make and that we have made. I welcome the Government’s new restrictions on advertising to children, with the new watershed restriction and online advert ban as a strong first step to reduce exposure. We have to do more to make food accessible, cheaper and more available in communities where they have the least. The uprating of the sugar levy will force businesses to further innovate their products, lower the sugar content and find taste without relying on unhealthy additives. The revenue raised, as we have heard, could be used to address the gap in accessibility to healthier food at community level, particularly in those areas with the greatest challenges.
I look forward to that constructive conversation continuing across the House. Doing nothing is not an option if we are to have a healthy workforce in future, reduce health inequalities facing those with the least, and leave our children a legacy of living longer, healthier and more active lives.
(3 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberAbsolutely, and I will come to that shortly.
That leaves women feeling dismissed, ignored and belittled by the very people who should be helping them. The result is that it takes almost nine years on average to get a diagnosis of endometriosis in the UK. I therefore look forward to hearing from the Minister on the steps she is taking to promote better awareness.
I am sorry; I have got to make progress.
I do not underestimate the task for Ministers in fixing our NHS after it was left in tatters by the previous Government. Waiting lists for gynaecological care have grown faster than those for any other specialty in recent years, leaving many women in agony. The women’s health strategy correctly identified some of these chronic issues, but in the absence of funding to back that up, we have gone further and further backwards from what we need.
For instance, women’s health hubs have improved women’s access to healthcare services, but the previous Government failed to give them long-term certainty and their funding is set to run out in March. As the Government work hard to rebuild the NHS, improving gynaecological care must be at the centre of that, because women have waited long enough. Will the Minister therefore update the House on how the Government will implement the measures in the women’s health strategy?
We must continue to encourage research into endometriosis. Our world-leading researchers are doing vital work in clinical trials to find better ways to manage and treat this condition. They will not stop until they find a cure. Therefore, will the Minister outline what steps she is taking to support clinical research and ensure that women are able to get on to those clinical trials? If we have a cure, it is obvious that we will not have any of the problems that I have spoken about.
I commend the Women and Equalities Committee on its excellent report into women’s reproductive health conditions. It has made a number of recommendations, including on employment rights, and I look forward to reading the Government’s response. I hope that they will listen to calls to give specific mention to reproductive health as part of the Employment Rights Bill, which has cross-party support. I also praise Endometriosis UK for its invaluable work in supporting women with this condition and campaigning for change. It acts as the secretariat for the all-party parliamentary group on endometriosis, of which I am an officer.
I thank my hon. Friend for securing this critical debate. With an average of eight-plus years for a diagnosis, does she agree that employers must build a more supportive and flexible approach that embeds policies to help women, such the endo-friendly employers scheme? Will she join me in thanking campaigners such as the Endo Warriors West Lothian for their tireless awareness-raising efforts?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right—that is what we are talking about. For many years, the APPG was chaired by our dear friend David Amess. David campaigned tirelessly for improvements to endometriosis care, and he will forever remain on our minds as we continue his legacy.