Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Mims Davies Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 11th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

There is no issue of conscience more capable of dividing constituents, families or, indeed, this House, than that of assisted dying. We can all agree that no one wants to suffer unnecessarily at the end of their life, and that no one wants to witness their loved ones suffering. We are all here in this place doing what we believe is best to achieve that end.

This debate means that the subject of death as a process is again out of the shadows, where we as a society have thrust it over many years. We have been unwilling to confront our own mortality, avoiding difficult discussions even with our own families until reality finally hits us, as it does—we just do not know how. It is a truth that the death of a loved one, and our own inevitable decline, can sometimes arrive with real fear, real pain and, sadly, too much unnecessary and unsupported suffering, but it does come to us all. It would be wiser for us to be ready to face it, to prepare for it and to be able to live with it as individuals, as families and as a society.



For those of us here today as lawmakers, the reality is that a change can happen in all our lives—whether a bolt from the blue, an accident, an incident, a tragedy, a violent attack, a diagnosis or simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time—that can mean life changes in an instant. Who you are, what you are capable of and what your life is now and onwards comes into focus.

My dad’s life and that of my family changed in an instant. He was attacked at work. Punches were thrown and he fell and hit his head on the kerb. He was saved by a passing man on his lunch break with first aid training. I was 11. Dad did not recognise us for several months. The financial impact was that we eventually lost our home, our family business and the surety that his hard work had given us.

Disablement can begin at birth, it can be acquired or it can come with a health condition—all determining what happens next. Yet we are legislating potentially to fundamentally change every person’s relationship with the state, their doctor and the NHS, depending on their health, their preparedness for what is next and the support they may or may not have.

Over the past two years, I have listened carefully to my colleagues from all parts of the House who have made personal arguments for and against. I have read the many briefings sent to me by charities, organisations, groups and representatives from right across our society. I have heard, too, from 1,000 or so of my constituents, who I thank deeply for sharing their own stories and thoughts. I have reflected back on my own experience, and that of my father, friends and loved ones, as one does when one witnesses an accident or incident, a health condition or, eventually, the death of a loved one. We know that many people are fighting for—and come to this place to fight for—better lives, better treatment, updated drugs, better knowledge and empathy. They often live longer, and push to live longer, than the initial prognosis they have been given.

My father lived a longer life than my mum, who became his main carer. She had previously worked with disabled young adults, helping them into work and helping them to thrive. As someone who previously had the honour of being the Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work, I roundly appreciate that some of our most vulnerable often feel under-acknowledged, undervalued, unheard and screened out of life and work in wider society. In that role, I had to learn not base policymaking on my own thoughts and my own family experiences, but to put good lawmaking at the heart of what I did. People must not feel pressured, worthless or subject to coercion, defined solely by what they cannot do.

My dad too often felt worthless. Long term, he felt less of a man, no longer a provider or a business owner. He went back to his farming roots, but a head and neck injury meant that that was not sustainable. An unseen disability saw him succumb to early onset dementia, with trauma-induced epilepsy and diabetes. He far too often felt he was worth more to us dead than alive. That was long before social media and the additional pressure that that entails.

I therefore believe, sadly, that this process is completely wrong. It is wrong to use the vehicle of this Bill to bring forward such societal consequence and change—changing the relationship between patient and doctor, and individual and state, and changing significantly the connection we all have with the NHS.

[Dame Meg Hillier]

Is the hon. Lady not, like me, puzzled that the promoter brought back the same Bill, despite there being many amendments that the sponsor in the Lords agreed needed to be made and the promoter today acknowledged needed to be included?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mims Davies]

Absolutely; we are here to make good laws. Today’s vote, as we have heard, is not simply on the principle of the Bill, but on the detail—or, frankly, the lack of detail. Good intentions are not enough. We are voting not on what we want to happen because of the Bill, but on what will happen. We cannot continue to divorce it from reality. It will have an impact right across Government and our communities, and intertwine us swiftly in new challenges. Too often in this place, we have good intentions but no delivery plan. We cannot continue in that way. The Bill’s sponsor in the other place felt the need to bring forward 70 amendments of his own.

[Sir John Hayes]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

[Mims Davies]

Let me make some progress.

I have four main concerns: funding, the assessment process, the lack of institutional opt-outs and, crucially, the auto-commencement clause. Can we all look our local NHS teams in the eye, knowing that we are ultimately taking more resources from them?

The equality impact assessment explicitly acknowledges the impact on disabled people and those from ethnic minorities—people we often speak about in this place, because we are the ones who can speak up for them. This Bill is at odds with that. There is much more I would like to say, but I need to conclude.

This Bill, although well intentioned, is simply a mixture of naivety, idealism and wishful thinking. There is no delivery plan, and it greatly raises the hopes of our constituents in their hour of need for care, good support and understanding. We are being asked to send this Bill back to the other place and perhaps to use the Parliament Act to force it through, regardless of its fitness for purpose and with full knowledge of its flaws and lack of workability, just to get it done. However, that means we are not listening even to the doctors who have spoken in this place today. I cannot subscribe to this type of lawmaking, no matter how well intentioned.

I am grateful that we are talking about life and death, end-of-life care and the value we put on people and loved ones. We are fighting for better palliative care, and we are doing what we can to give people all they need as death approaches. However, I cannot in good faith support an unsafe private Member’s Bill or the process we are undertaking today.

Oral Answers to Questions

Mims Davies Excerpts

Wednesday 17th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

Boarded-up windows, derelict buildings and deserted towns are increasingly common on high streets in Wales, as highlighted by North Wales Live and its readers. Our hospitality sector is being hollowed out thanks to Plaid Cymru and the last Welsh Labour Government’s disastrous tourism tax. The Conservative and Unionist party believes that this tax should be urgently scrapped to support the approximately 150,000 people in Wales who are employed in this crucial sector. Does the Minister now regret her party’s decision to impose the tax, and will she join me in calling on the new Welsh Government to scrap it?

[Anna McMorrin]

I will take no lectures from the Conservatives and the hon. Member when her party presided over completely unprecedented wage stagnation and businesses took blow after blow, with—to be specific—the worst wage growth performance of any decade since Napoleonic times. On our side of the House, the Chancellor announced just last week the great summer savings scheme, with a reduction of VAT from 20% to 5% over the summer to help families enjoy the summer and use hospitality venues. This will boost local spend and boost the local economy.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

“Inadequate…failing…unable”. Those were the damning words used to describe this Labour Government’s approach to defence by the former Defence Secretary, the right hon. Member for Rawmarsh and Conisbrough (John Healey), after his dramatic resignation. The defence industry in Wales is vital for the defence of us all, as well as for local jobs. Will the Secretary of State acknowledge why, after a recent defence visit, the Wales Office used the incorrect figure on X of a £270 billion increase in defence spending in this Parliament? Was that post deleted because it was disinformation and factually inaccurate?

[Jo Stevens]

I am reassured to hear the Conservative party finally acknowledging the importance of defence spending. This Government are undertaking the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the cold war. We are doing that to keep Wales and UK safe, and to create thousands of new, well-paid jobs. The hon. Member’s party left office having hollowed out our armed forces, leaving military homes in a disgusting state, so I am glad that she has finally learned the lessons of previous Tory failures.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

The previous Welsh Labour Government spent more than £100 million developing plans for the M4 relief road, only to scrap the project before construction began. Congestion at the Brynglas tunnels continues to cause significant delays, hampering economic growth. The previous Conservative UK Government offered funding to back that crucial scheme. Will the Secretary of State urge her colleagues to make a similar offer to the new Welsh Government, and does she regret her party’s decision to cancel this vital project in the first place?

[Jo Stevens]

This Government have delivered the biggest financial settlement for the Welsh Government in devolution history, with nearly £6.5 billion more spending power for public services in Wales, and that includes funding for transport. That contrasts with the activities of the hon. Member’s Conservative Government, who, through austerity, starved public services in Wales of funding.

Oral Answers to Questions

Mims Davies Excerpts

Wednesday 28th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

Seventy-five-year-old Valerie Kneale died four days after a stroke due to manslaughter, a coroner ruled. Her death prompted a murder investigation, as the post-mortem showed that a forcible sexual assault directly caused her death. Surviving in Scrubs campaigns to tackle sexual harassment and, crucially, sexual assault across the healthcare system. Hospitals and care homes should be the safest places to recover from childbirth, accident or illness. What is the Minister doing to deal with predators lurking in our NHS who target women at work or, sickeningly, those who are at their most vulnerable?

[Karin Smyth]

The hon. Lady raises a shocking example. I think I have said this at the Dispatch Box before, but it is one of the most shocking experiences, on coming in as a new Minister, to see the scale and depth of sexual harassment of staff and other women. We have worked hard with staff groups to make sure that that is given primacy in our strategy. I am working with the Minister with responsibility for violence against women and girls—the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips)—and this is part of our attack more generally on misogyny and violence against women. We absolutely recognise that it needs to be resolved.

Oral Answers to Questions

Mims Davies Excerpts

Wednesday 5th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

This Government talk about better protection for women and girls while actively passing changes to our sentencing laws that disgracefully mean that more than 90% of grooming offenders and 60% of rapists sent to prison will get their prison time cut. Was there an assessment of the impact of those changes on women and girls specifically? Can the Minister point to a single organisation representing women and girls that supports cutting prison time for sexual assault or grooming to one third of the sentence?

[Jess Phillips]

I will have to go away and check exactly what the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones) has said regarding the people who the hon. Lady says will be released, because there are, of course, exceptions—and more exceptions than there were under her Government’s prison release scheme, because people like me and my hon. Friend had oversight of this process and cared about the women involved.

It is absolutely shocking that someone from a Government who oversaw the total collapse of our prison system, where we would not have been able to arrest rapists because there were no places for them in prison, can dare to stand there and suggest that that is something that we should—it is unbelievable that she cannot recognise her own role in this.

Violence against Women and Girls

Mims Davies Excerpts

Thursday 9th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to be called in this important debate to speak on behalf of His Majesty’s loyal Opposition. I welcome this general debate being called by the Government on such a topical issue as we return to the Chamber in the new year. It is important that there is a significant focus on women and girls being heard in every single community. I agree with the Minister: enough is enough. That is one of the most magnificent campaigns the Home Office could have come up with, and I applaud all those who work in the Department on this important issue and who are focused on protecting women and girls in every nation, region and community.

I heard people being congratulated in business questions on their awards in the new year honours. One of those was Nicole Jacobs, the Domestic Abuse Commissioner, who I had the pleasure of working with, and I know that Ministers will enjoy working with her.

Let us all agree in the Chamber this afternoon and say clearly that we do not accept any abuse directed at us as Members of Parliament, Ministers and people speaking up for women and girls, such as that we have seen in recent days. There are women and girls in our communities who want to know that we are here and are focused on keeping them safe. When it comes to domestic abuse or any kind of criminality aimed at women and girls in our community, criminality is criminality, wherever it is found. Domestic abuse, wherever it is, must continue to be tackled. It cannot remain untackled; it must always be uncovered. I welcome the measures that the Minister outlined in her speech and the strategy, in terms of education, support and the pursuit of justice, particularly in respect of deepfakes and intimate images.

I appreciate the focus on halving violence against women and girls, but that is not enough. Let us focus on pure eradication—that is one thing that those from all parts of the House can agree on. We can equally agree on how wonderful Dawn Dines is. She has led the Stamp Out Spiking campaign and brought such energy to it. In my brief time working in the Department, I wanted to see a focus on an updated spiking law, so let us celebrate with Dawn when that comes through.

We very much welcome the protection orders that have been brought forward. On behalf of my party, I want to thank and applaud all the charities, groups and networks that support survivors and victims, so that there is always someone to turn to. I would like to reiterate that: there is always someone to turn to, so please speak out. All too often, people feel that they will not be heard. Sadly, there is a leap from rhetoric to intimidation and then potentially to violence when it comes into the political arena. We need to ensure that that does not seep down into what victims feel might happen to them if they come forward and speak out.

Our men and young boys are key, as the Minister said. This is a partnership. Everything in life and in the community is a partnership. I have the honour of co-chairing the all-party parliamentary group on men and boys’ issues, and I ask the Minister to update the House on the men and boys ambassador and the ministerial work being done on this.

It is the duty of any Government to keep their citizens safe, and I am proud of the work of the outgoing Conservative Government. We did our utmost to fulfil that job. In the face of the pandemic and the war on our continent, we focused on ensuring that our constituents felt safer and that our commitment to this never wavered. Progress is best made when a Government build on the foundations of the previous one; perhaps this fixing of the foundations is one area that we can agree on. It was therefore a little bit disappointing to see in the Labour manifesto—some of us did read it—that

“For too long, violence against women and girls has been ignored.”

I do not think that is the case, but let us not have 50% of it ignored; let us have the whole lot eradicated. Let us ensure that the voices and the asks of the women and girls in our communities are listened to.

In the last 24 hours there has been a vote on victims of grooming gangs, which was very difficult. We need to set the record straight on why the Opposition are strongly focused on getting agreement that no stone should be left unturned on this issue. The previous Government accepted 18 of the 20 recommendations in the important Jay review, and it is disappointing that the legislation could not be agreed on before the change of Government, although it was put forward in the wash-up—a techie term, for people watching. Ultimately, we wanted to tackle the issue, and my party is again determined to work with the Government to get this moving.

The last Conservative Home Secretary to focus on grooming gangs was my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Fareham and Waterlooville (Suella Braverman), who rightly set up the taskforce that led to 500 further arrests and over 4,000 more victims protected. In all the hubbub of the last day or two, what is important is that the questions of victims and survivors are answered on the recommendations of the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse.

The taskforce set up under the Conservative Government worked with 43 forces in England and Wales on supporting investigations into child sexual exploitation and grooming. It is right to give our police officers on the frontline the support they need to tackle this scandal. The Minister rightly talked about justice, but it must start with coming forward to the police. I completely agree with her: the crucial step of coming forward and saying what has happened is the bravest and hardest thing imaginable for a young child or woman who knows that the people around them should have been protecting them. We need to ensure that the police are there for them.

As a vital next step, let us all agree to collect the data on ethnicity. Let us not shy away from this. Let us get it and share it. This is at the heart of the matter. People feel that political correctness should not hold us back. To protect all victims from sexual abuse and abhorrent crimes, no stone should be unturned. This is further and wider than what IICSA investigated, which is why my party believes that a further-reaching inquiry is urgently needed. There was nothing in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. As my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) said, nobody in the Chamber should feel that they cannot raise on the Floor of the House, without fear or favour, something that is happening in their constituency. That is what we come here to do.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)]

No one should ever feel afraid of raising any issue in this Chamber with me or anybody else. To reiterate, the ethnicity data is collected. It was published for the first time in November, and I am not entirely sure why the Opposition keep insisting that it has not been published. To be honest, the data that had started to be collected under their Government is not good enough, and we will be working to improve it, but ethnicity data is collected and published.

[Mims Davies]

I thank the hon. Lady for coming to the Dispatch Box to give that undertaking to the House. Our friend Sajid Javid and others were keen to ensure that that was out there. I am sure that will reassure the House.

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

I want to go a bit further on that data. Does the hon. Member accept that in the 2022 police report on child sexual exploitation, where there were more than two perpetrators, the ethnicity data pointed to 76% of the perpetrators being white, 9% being black and 9% being Asian?

[Mims Davies]

I thank the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee; hers is a welcome voice for women and girls. I agree with her: we are keen to look at the data. What has been underscored this week, however, is that some people feel that we have not got to the broadest extent of the issue. That is why some people feel disappointed.

Let me broaden our discussion of VAWG. Significant measures were introduced by the former Conservative Government, including a rapid increase in the number of police officers and the introduction of the all-important law enforcement tool that they need in communities to listen to victims and act on their behalf. New legislation was introduced—crucial legislation that the Government are rightly building on—in the form of the Conservatives’ landmark Domestic Abuse Act 2021, which was passed to recognise the more insidious forms of abuse that blight victims’ lives, often before they realise it themselves. Lady Theresa May and others have campaigned against those insidious forms of abuse, which can also lead to gateway crimes in other areas.

On VAWG specifically, a further domestic abuse plan was launched in 2021, with over half the commitments completed by the previous Conservative Government. Many people will remember that, crucially, it brought young children and family members into the purview of domestic abuse. Other strategies included spending £6.6 million on delivering interventions to improve our understanding of what works in preventing violence against women and girls; ensuring the consistency of support services through the introduction of the national commissioning standards of the victims funding strategy, to which the Minister alluded; and launching the VAWG support and specialist services fund, with £8.3 million to support victims who face barriers to coming forward.

The Worker Protection (Amendment of Equality Act 2010) Act 2023 brought in a new duty for employers to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment of employees. From my time at the Department of Work and Pensions, I know that talking to people about what is going on in their world and bringing it forward to their employer is often a gateway for people to be able to move to safety. We delivered £150 million of funding for the safer streets fund and the safety of women at night fund, with a range of projects helping to improve public safety. Sussex’s police and crime commissioner Katie Bourne and others will know about that.

Importantly, we have the national domestic abuse helpline, other helplines on revenge porn and the Suzy Lamplugh Trust national stalking helpline, and I welcome the Minister’s comments on that. Through the important flexible support fund, we provided a further £2 million to remove the additional barriers that domestic abuse victims face when leaving their abusers, which can be costly. Domestic abuse is in every corner of our country and at every economic level. People perceive that only certain women and certain families can be affected by this matter, which often stops those who are in fear coming forward.

I know that Labour Members like to conclude that we did nothing for 14 years, but let me quickly remind them that we won four elections. We did not do nothing on women and girls; we made a real and tangible difference in tackling violence against women and girls. I am sure that we all agree this afternoon that there is always more to be done in every nation, region and community.

[Dame Karen Bradley (Staffordshire Moorlands) (Con)]

My hon. Friend is making a very effective speech and showing that this is a process, not an event. Governments have been working hard on this issue for many years, and this year marks 10 years since the introduction of the coercive control offence, which I was very proud to take through as a Minister in the Serious Crime Act 2015. That is the kind of change that Governments have built on and worked on, and we are all on the same page on this issue.

[Mims Davies]

I thank my right hon. Friend for her work. We in this House will go wherever this issue takes us in every community. What is crucial is that victims and, equally, perpetrators know that VAWG will be tackled and that we will act in uniformity where we can.

Rightly, the Minister mentioned that we banned upskirting and ended the so-called rough sex defence. We introduced the offence of non-fatal strangulation and, through the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, ended the automatic halfway release for serious violent and sexual offenders. From my time at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, I remember that we extended the “positions of trust” focus on sports coaches and faith leaders. The Minister rightly talked about the courts process and the feeling of justice; what would be the point of letting people out halfway through their sentence?

I remind the House that, sadly, the Labour party did not always support us, but now it is in government. Women’s charities have continued to express concerns about the Government’s early release scheme, including Women’s Aid back in October. Following the first wave of releases last month, we have seen our long-standing concerns come to fruition. On behalf of Women’s Aid, I ask Ministers to reiterate the importance of tackling this matter. On the early release of perpetrators, the issue is not necessarily finance but the mental health of their victims.

In this afternoon’s debate we need to think about the women and girls—our constituents—growing up in our communities and families. We will continue to have a thoughtful examination of the facts, find a way forward to tackle this set of horrendous crimes, and give women and girls the confidence to come forward and have it tackled.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mims Davies]

With the leave of the House, I am grateful to respond to the debate on behalf of His Majesty’s official Opposition. The spirit of the debate has been strident. We have not always been wholly in agreement, but where we have disagreed, we have done so with respect and kindness, which is exactly how I approach this issue. I know that the Ministers opposite me do exactly the same. It is not easy to move from being a campaigner to a Minister. As MPs, we are campaigners for our own constituencies; that unites us all.

I am grateful for the range of contributions made by all hon. Members. It is right that we did not shy away from what needed saying, and I will take a moment to cover a few matters that came up. I must reiterate that in our 14 years in government, a huge amount of work was done in this area. None of it is easy, and none of it is done on its own.

I am grateful for the work done by my right hon. Friend the Member for Louth and Horncastle (Victoria Atkins), in her role as Minister for Women and in the Home Office; by the former Safeguarding Minister, Laura Farris; by my right hon. Friend the Member for Witham (Dame Priti Patel), in all her time in government; and by my right hon. Friend the Member for Staffordshire Moorlands (Dame Karen Bradley).

As I said earlier, this is about building on the foundations established by many women and much partnership work across constituencies and sectors. I think of the work of Maggie Blyth, who stepped up as the national police lead in the wake of the brutal murder of Sarah Everard, following on from the work of the Casey review, listening to women’s testimony and working on that basis of it. I think of Festus and his time as Bedfordshire’s police and crime commissioner; I remember joining him to learn how mobile phone technology from the Home Office could be downloaded within 24 hours to help women and girls get the justice that they need.

Operation Soteria adopted a transformative approach to tackling rape and other sexual offences: it was a game changer for women in policing, and had the impact that was needed on investigations and prosecutions. It is right that the cross-Government tackling violence against women strategy of 2021 built on the work of those who came before. We have heard about the national communications campaign and the Enough campaign. We know of the work to criminalise virginity testing, the work that we did to change the taxi licensing regime, the £1.5 million a year spent on specialist support services dealing with revenge porn, and, of course, the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, which I mentioned earlier.

Let me now turn to some of the contributions that we have heard today. The hon. Member for Milton Keynes Central (Emily Darlington) rightly talked about halting violence against women and girls, and also said that she felt somewhat sorry for me, which I appreciate. However, I must reiterate that the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which we debated yesterday, contains no additional work in this realm. These debates are important, and the Minister knows that. We need to do more than engage in general debates in the pursuit of justice. I welcome the work that was outlined by the Safeguarding Minister earlier, and we in the Opposition will certainly focus on the full eradication of deepfakes.

As we heard from the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft), victims can never easily move on from the violence perpetrated against women and girls. Offenders may forget the details after their rehabilitation, but we and our constituents know that the victims will never forget. My hon. Friend the Member for Huntingdon (Ben Obese-Jecty) pointed out the juxtaposition between what is done by the political party called Reform and its belief that other parties do not turn over the stones. What he said was right: no barrier should be unbroken when it comes to talking about what happens to women and girls. Where political differences exist, we can say in unity that we in the House must continue to enable women and girls to feel safe. We must agree that people can turn their lives around only by telling the full truth, which is how victims and survivors can feel that true justice has taken place.

I welcome the cross-Government approach described by the hon. Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth (Rachel Taylor), and her focus on the subject of coercive control. Nothing will get done about that without cross-Government working, and I was very much part of that as a Minister. My hon. Friend the Member for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith) viewed male violence against women and girls through a public health lens, and said that a community partnership was vital. She also spoke about the dedicated work that needs to be done to protect single-sex spaces. Whether it is done in the NHS, by the police or through charities, we need a full picture, and guidance, showing what women and girls and expect, so that male violence against them is dealt with and people feel safe through that public health lens and, more important, in those spaces.

The hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sorcha Eastwood), who is no longer in her place, spoke movingly, poignantly and bravely about the fact that the victims and perpetrators are the people we know and love. It was staggering to hear her say that women still feel like they literally have to fight for their lives. She spoke about rape threat culture, and said she was worried that her speech looked like a self-indulgent rant. Speaking up is never a self-indulgent rant. Dealing with the toxicity, bringing the power of women into the debate and calling people out is exactly the bravery it takes, and I pay tribute to her on behalf of my party.

The hon. Member for Poplar and Limehouse (Apsana Begum), who is a very brave lady, spoke about the importance of employment and how it can bring someone into the next stage of their life. I pay tribute to somebody I worked with stridently at the DWP who worked on the employers domestic abuse covenant, which can help get people into work and on to the next steps of life. I hope she will lean into that.

My hon. Friend the Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) spoke about the change in the perception of what love is and the fact that, through social media aggression, violence in a loving relationship is apparently becoming a norm. She talked about the normalisation of abuse in relationships, how it is confusing for our young men and boys to know what love is, and the link between porn culture and desensitisation. She was right to talk about degrading acts that are not acts of love—they are acts of aggression and violence—and to say that we need to help young men and boys not to get caught up in that culture.

That leads me on to my right hon. Friend the Member for Staffordshire Moorlands, who spoke about AI and tech, about helping men to find the solution, how we deal with these challenges and how our way of life is being undermined, which is very concerning. Despite the coercive control laws, the multi-agency working and the VAWG strategies of 2016 and 2021 and the one coming from this Labour Government, there is a change in the challenges of female genital mutilation, modern slavery, grooming and domestic abuse—and I reiterate that it is not domestic abuse; it is criminality in the home. It is not acceptable, and we must always treat it accordingly and root it out. Whether it is the updated internet safety strategy or other work, all of society needs to get behind the challenge that tech and AI will present.

I thank the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, the hon. Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen), for the focus that she is bringing to this issue, including on the importance of good male role models and the work on deepfakes.

I turn to grooming gangs. The Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, the hon. Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips), intervened on me at 1.18 pm to say that the ethnicity data on grooming gangs is collected and published. Will she and her team place a copy in the Library or share it directly with my office, so that we can be clear what data is currently available and where it is linked to? For clarity, we want police-recorded grooming gang ethnicity data, not self-reported CSE data. This links to the previous Government’s announcement of April 2023. This proper data was welcomed by Professor Jay, and it is very important. This is not about politics; it is about clarity and not letting this issue lie. The IICSA report looked at six towns our of what is now reported to be 50, so victims’ voices have simply not all been examined.

I want to turn to bandwagoning. The hon. Member for Rochdale (Paul Waugh) rightly spoke about listening to the voices of the victims. My hon. Friend the Member for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston (Neil O’Brien), the shadow Education Minister, said that we are not going to let this lie when it comes to grooming, because we must not screen out women’s and girls’ voices. If we agree with the bandwagon, apparently it is fine, but if we do not agree with the bandwagon, apparently it is “politicising” to call something out. Many of us are here focusing on and dealing with causes because we are on the bandwagon—we believe it. It is what has brought us to frontline politics. We will never let it go. Bandwagoning can also come with purpose and real change. If we are going to not just halve violence against women and girls but eradicate it, let us not be afraid to deal with bandwagons.