Lesbian Visibility Week

Sarah Dyke Excerpts

Thursday 24th April 2025 Westminster Hall

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Butler. I congratulate the hon. Member for Jarrow and Gateshead East (Kate Osborne) for securing this vital debate and for her excellent speech. It is wonderful to hear from so many sisters across the House. Lesbian visibility matters because representation brings understanding, and understanding brings change. I want to talk about the inequalities that lesbians still face, the value of community and safe spaces, and what we as legislators can do to ensure that lesbians are not just seen but heard, respected and supported.

But before I do, I want to take a moment to celebrate a woman who spent her life working for lesbian rights and visibility. I was delighted to learn that earlier this year, Studio Voltaire and the London LGBT+ Forums’ Network unveiled a rainbow plaque honouring the inspirational Jackie Forster outside her former London home. After her death, it was said that if she had served a cause other than lesbian rights, she would have been festooned with honours. She would have been called Dame Jackie Forster. So courageous was she that, in 1969, she came out by announcing to the world at Speakers’ Corner,

“You are looking at a roaring dyke”,

a name I often get called.

Jackie was daring and unapologetic, and we must ensure that her fortitude and her legacy continue. Jackie spearheaded the launch of the triumphant and bold 1970s lesbian magazine, Sappho, a publication that reached out to women suffering crippling isolation at a time when the pressure of heterosexual compliance was high. Sappho created a much needed safe forum that allowed women to realise that they were not freakish outcasts or mentally unwell; they were lesbians, and there were many other women like them.

Fifty years on, in 2023, University College London published a sobering study showing that LGB individuals are three times more likely to self-harm and twice as likely to experience suicidal thoughts compared with heterosexual people. Within that group, lesbians face specific and significant mental health challenges, ranging from increased rates of depression to internalised self-hate. These challenges are even more pronounced among those who have not felt able to disclose their sexual orientation. The mental health inequalities that lesbians face stem in large part from what has been called “minority stress”.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dawn Butler (in the Chair)]

The debate may continue until 3.25 pm.

[Sarah Dyke]

As I was saying before I was so rudely interrupted by the Division bell, the mental health inequalities that lesbians face stem in large part from what has been called “minority stress”, which is the strain of navigating a world that too often marginalises or misunderstands them. Internalised stigma, fear of rejection and the emotional toll of either concealing or repeatedly disclosing one’s identity all contribute. But there is a powerful antidote: community, a sense of belonging, support from others who understand. That is why lesbian spaces matter.

Lesbian bars, clubs and social venues have long provided a sanctuary—a space to be oneself, free from judgment or hyper-sexualization, free from the male gaze or a society that does not always understand. Yet in many parts of the UK and across the west, lesbian venues are vanishing. The 1990s saw a surge of women-only spaces in London including First Out, the Candy Bar, Vespa, Glass Bar, Due South and Oak Bar, many of which I have frequented. Sadly, they had all closed by 2015. In Amsterdam, a city long seen as a beacon of LGBT+ inclusion, one of the last lesbian bars, Vivelavie, closed in 2017 after nearly four decades.

A recent survey of more than 500 lesbians showed that 96% were concerned about the loss of lesbian spaces and community groups. This must act as a wake-up call. We need better research into this decline and greater innovation in how we support and preserve lesbian-only spaces and communities, both physical and digital.

We must also address how media, particularly online pornography, contributes to the damaging stereotyping of lesbians. Lesbian porn is consistently among the most-searched categories on mainstream sites, yet the portrayals are not reflective of reality. Instead, they are often harmful and degrading, and they distort how lesbians are perceived by others, and worse still, by themselves. Increasingly, young same-sex attracted women are distancing themselves from the term “lesbian” due to its association with those harmful tropes. Our education system must respond. It is essential that we reform relationships and sex education not only to protect children from the harms of online pornography, but to challenge these stereotypes and promote positive and diverse lesbian role models, because every child deserves to see someone like them reflected in the world around them.

Internationally, we must not turn a blind eye. In many countries, same-sex attraction remains a criminal offence and, in some cases, lesbians face abhorrent violence. The 2008 brutal gang rape and murder of South African footballer Eudy Simelane shone a light on the horror of so-called “corrective rape”, a hate crime that is still reported around the world, especially in the global south. The UK must be a leader in global human rights, pushing for decriminalisation and protection for same-sex-attracted people around the world.

Lesbians also face different challenges when they begin to consider starting a family. All LGBTQ+ people deserve equitable access to the reproductive healthcare services they need, but inequalities persist and must be addressed urgently. Only three of the 42 ICBs in England give female same-sex couples access to fertility funding, while others give access to funding to women who have not conceived after two years of unprotected intercourse, or six to 12 self-funded rounds of artificial insemination. That is clearly discriminatory.

One cycle of IVF costs about £5,000 or more, so some women will need to find in excess of £30,000 to start a family. Some are so desperate to start their family that they are forced to seek alternative, often dangerous routes, where they put themselves physically, psychologically and legally at risk. As always, the costs of those risks far outweigh the costs of their fertility treatment. The Liberal Democrats will therefore push for an integrated care body to make this change a priority, to ensure that equitable access to IVF is available for all lesbian couples who are looking to start their own family.

Let me end on a note of hope. The British social attitudes survey shows our country has become significantly more open and accepting. In 1983, 17% of people believed that same-sex relationships were not wrong at all. In 2023, that figure stood at 67%. And those who say same-sex relationships are always wrong has plummeted from 50% to just 9%. Such progress matters. It helps to make people feel safer, more accepted and more empowered to live openly and authentically. Liberal Democrats believe in a freer, fairer and more compassionate society. That includes recognising and uplifting lesbian voices, protecting lesbian culture and ensuring that everybody, especially those who are most marginalised in our communities, feel safe, supported and seen.

Oral Answers to Questions

Sarah Dyke Excerpts

Wednesday 13th March 2024 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for highlighting the improvement in maternity services at the Royal Cornwall. She is a tireless campaigner on reducing baby loss, and I commend her for her recent work on the introduction of baby loss certificates. As she knows, we are committed to a new women and children’s hospital for her local trust in 2030, as part of the new hospital programme.

[Sarah Dyke (Somerton and Frome) (LD)]

Q12. My constituents in Somerton and Frome, working together with the Langport Transport Group, submitted a robust strategic business case to the Government in July 2022 for the reopening of a train station in the Somerton and Langport area. Such a train station would connect over 50,000 people to the rail network, boost the local economy and support local people to reduce their reliance on cars. Almost two years on, they are still waiting for a response. Does the Prime Minister support this project, and can he provide confidence to my constituents that their hard work to drive this vital project forward has not been futile?

[The Prime Minister]

Conservatives in the south-west are rightly championing the reopening of local stations. Cullompton and Wellington will be among the places that receive funding as a result of our decision on HS2. It is because of that decision that we have now freed up billions of pounds of funding to invest in local transport across the country, and local leaders will be put in charge of that money to prioritise their local needs.

Farming

Sarah Dyke Excerpts

Monday 4th March 2024 Commons Chamber

[Sarah Dyke (Somerton and Frome) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Mid Norfolk (George Freeman). I recommend that he takes his place at Harper Adams University; as a former student, I know how good it is.

I am proud to represent a beautiful rural constituency in Somerset, which has a strong tradition of family-run farms. Indeed, Thomas Hardy called the Blackmore vale, part of which is in my constituency, the “vale of the little dairies”. The farms are managed by successive generations of families, including my own family’s farm.

Farmers are the lifeblood of rural communities. They are the custodians of our beautiful countryside. They care about the environment and work hard day in, day out to produce food for our tables. Yet there is a litany of ways in which the Government have ignored and neglected farmers for far too long. The Prime Minister recently said that he has got the “back” of farmers, but the farmers I speak to tell me that the Government have turned their back on them. The potential Brexit benefit, the promised “public money for public goods” environmental land management scheme, has been horribly botched and delayed, leaving many farmers on the brink. Some do not know if they will be able to survive the next 12 months. If they are forced to leave the industry, they will join the 110,000 farms that have been lost to the industry since 1990.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) mentioned, only one in eight farmers is signed up to the sustainable farming incentive, because there is no incentive to switch. There is little flexibility, meaning many are stuck on lower payment rates. I am not alone in my concern that the SFI may discourage food production over environmental schemes. One farmer in my constituency suggested that they will need to farm nearly double the area they normally farm to achieve the same output alongside meeting their targets under the SFI. Farmers are worried that their central task of producing food is no longer the Government’s central concern. Farmers want to put food on our tables. If they cannot, we will be less food secure and we will need to import more food. I welcome measures to improve our environmental standards, but disincentivising food production will just shift environmental problems.

I agree with the hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Sir Bill Wiggin): our farmers are certainly not revolting—but they are revolting against this woeful Conservative Government. When we Liberal Democrats say we get it, we mean it. Three rural by-election results in as many years prove it is the Liberal Democrats that farmers trust to back British farming. Farmers have told us they need three things: proper funding, workforce planning and the renegotiation of recent trade deals. Only the Liberal Democrats have a real plan to support farmers and rural communities, and that starts with a £1 billion boost to the farming budget so farms can thrive. We need small and medium-sized farms to be given the support they need to boost domestic food production and conserve our environment: things they want to do, but often do not have the time, manpower or budget to do.

The recent announcement of £220 million of funding seems fairly similar to the £227 million the Government have underspent in the past two years’ farming budget. It will not go anywhere near to addressing the crisis that farmers are facing. Farms desperately need workers, yet the seasonal worker visa scheme allows farms to recruit just 45,000 workers from abroad. According to the NFU, farmers say they need nearly double that—around 70,000 workers. We cannot leave our farmers and their crops to languish when we can act to solve the situation.

Lastly, we must urgently renegotiate the free trade agreements that the Government have used to shackle our farmers, disproportionately punishing them for holding some of the very highest standards in the world. The free trade agreements threaten to undercut and undermine our farmers even further, with cheap food hitting the supermarket shelves produced to lower welfare standards. The Farming Community Network ran a survey of over 500 farmers at last year’s LAMMA show, asking them what they are most proud of in their work. They answered: high standards of animal welfare, sustainability, and the strong sense of community in farming. Yet the trade deals threaten that. I once again call for them to be renegotiated, with proper parliamentary scrutiny of each one.

I spend much of my time out on farms. During recess week, I visited farms around Wincanton and Castle Cary in my constituency. Hon. Members may know that our recent recess week was during Mind Your Head Week, run by the Farm Safety Foundation, which raises mental health awareness among farmers. The Government announced a £500,000 boost for charities working on farmers’ mental health. I have written to the Department to request more details of that funding, which were absent from the recent announcement. I look forward to a written response, but I wonder if the Minister might share those details with the House this evening. I am very pleased to hear he was at a roundtable event this afternoon to discuss just that.

I have spoken with charities in this field, such as the Farm Safety Foundation, the Farming Community Network and the Royal Agricultural Benevolent Institution. They agree that the funding is welcome. The Farm Safety Foundation told me that it might reach 2,500 agricultural students a year if the new funding is given and maintained, but it needs comprehensive action from DEFRA and it needs to be invited to play a role in shaping the policy. We need to fund farmers properly and fund support services, so farmers and the people who interact with them are equipped with the knowledge they need to intervene early. We need clear, simple and targeted communications from DEFRA that recognise the pressures on farmers’ time. I want to see a style guide for DEFRA, similar to the one used by the NHS, to ensure that all users can understand the information clearly. It is unacceptable that DEFRA has been asking charities to simplify and rewrite its communications for it.

Finally, we need a long-term plan for British farming that safeguards our farmers, safeguards our food production and safeguards our environment. The financial pressures and bureaucracy that farmers face need to be eased, allowing them to focus on their core business of farming. Instead, the Government continue to undermine farmers who are at risk of losing their livelihoods. Our farmers and rural communities have been let down and taken for granted by the Conservatives for too long. Food security, environmental sustainability and rural economic prosperity are goals that farmers and the Government should share, but the Government simply do not care or just do not get it.