Puberty Suppressants Trial

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Wednesday 17th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Wes Streeting]

I wish I had certainty on this issue, and in some ways I envy my hon. Friend for his certainty. Having occasionally found myself to be a lonely voice in my party when sat on the Opposition Benches, I respect the fact that it is not easy to be a minority, dissenting voice, especially when one feels so strongly about an issue. I respect my hon. Friend’s position, even though I disagree with it—I do think this trial is the right thing to do. He is right that we need love, compassion and empathy for these young people; we also need to understand what health and care support will produce the best outcomes for them, which is what the trial is about.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for his leadership on this issue. Nobody envies him the decisions he has to make, but he has made the right decision on this.

During my election campaign, I met a fantastic mother—no mother could have loved their daughter more. She told me about how, when her daughter entered puberty, she had to come to terms with her biological sex, and about the impact on her mental health. To delay puberty, she stopped eating. She ended up arriving at hospital in an ambulance, so weak that she had to be treated in that ambulance. I welcome the fact that the trial will look at some of the side effects of puberty blockers, but will it also consider the impact of not taking puberty blockers in some cases? Will the Secretary of State also tell us how the House will be kept up to date on the trial as it progresses?

[Wes Streeting]

I can certainly promise my hon. Friend that we will keep the House regularly updated. The risks he has described have weighed heavily on my conscience when putting in place a permanent ban on puberty blockers; I have understood the risk involved, and the vulnerability of this particular group of children and young people. I also meant to say, in response to my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle and Clitheroe (Jonathan Hinder), that the parents of trans young people love their children very much. That has been at the heart of so many of the representations I have received, from parents as well as from young people.

Budget Resolutions

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Gethins]

We would have had the money that the hon. Lady talks about had we remained in the European Union and had access to European regional funding, which she does not want any more.

I am astonished at the split in the Labour party over what happens to the Chancellor. I am glad that the Chancellor has the hon. Lady’s confidence, but even the BBC is reporting that “we were misled”. We can all agree that the Chancellor holds a serious post. With the chair of the OBR gone, and the director general of the BBC having recently gone, we have to be sure that the Chancellor has the confidence of this House and those around her. Given the chaos of the past few days, we cannot be sure that that is the case anymore.

On a more positive note, I give the Health Secretary his due: the question of child poverty is close to his heart, as it is to mine, and he speaks passionately and eloquently about it. The Labour party was chucking out Members of Parliament for voting to get rid of the two-child cap, and it voted against our motion just a few weeks ago. A couple of years ago, the leader of the Scottish Labour party even said that getting rid of it would “spook the markets”. The markets have not been spooked. It has been done.

The Scottish Government were ahead of the game. What is the only part of the UK where child poverty is falling? Scotland. What is the only part of the UK that has a Scottish child payment that is driving down child poverty? Scotland. I know that the Health Secretary is constructive and takes this to heart.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

Will the hon. Member give way?

[Stephen Gethins]

I have already given way. I urge the Health Secretary to look at the benefits of the Scottish child payment. I am a believer in solidarity, and would love to see it being rolled out to the rest of the UK, given its successes in Scotland. I say that constructively, and I hope that the Health Secretary will consider it.

We are talking about renewal. On the energy sector, we have heard about Harbour Energy, which is the latest to announce job losses as a direct consequence of the energy profits levy. Offshore Energies UK has talked about the loss of thousands of jobs as a result of the levy. I remind the House that the UK is about the only state in the world that found oil and gas and never introduced a future generations fund. Why have such a fund? Because oil and gas are finite resources, and a fund allows us to invest in the future instead of taxing them out of existence, which is what is happening at the moment. I hear that from my constituents, and we hear it from across north-east Scotland.

Yesterday, the Prime Minister mentioned the failure of Brexit, and the Health Secretary has done the same. According to House of Commons figures, it is costing the public purse £250 million every day. That is a disgrace. It is a Tory and Reform failure that all of us are paying for. Trade is down. Brexit is responsible for a large chunk of the tax rises and, according to the Mayor of London’s research, made the economy £140 billion smaller. I appeal to the Labour party: start doing something differently from the Conservatives and Reform. They failed; please do not.

International Men’s Day

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Thursday 20th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

This debate is a chance to speak honestly about the pressures, expectations and challenges that too many men carry alone and in silence. My hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase (Josh Newbury) exemplified all that in his speech, and I thank him for it.

Across my constituency, there are organisations large and small supporting men and dads. One of them is Dads Rock, which has become a vital source of support for fathers at every stage of parenting. When I was elected last year, one of the first people to contact me was from Dads Rock, making it clear to me that I had to support the Dad Shift campaign.

I do not just have a dad joke, but a Scottish dad joke. There are 10 cows in a field, but which one is on holiday? Anyone? It is the one with a wee calf. [Laughter.] Thank you, thank you, but back to the Dad Shift. Its WhatsApp peer support group now brings together more than 700 dads from across the country. In its most recent survey, the top request from those fathers was for stronger mental health support, particularly for new dads.

We see the power of Dads Rock in stories like that of Euan, a young dad in his 20s in Edinburgh South West. He came to Dads Rock struggling with anxiety, isolation and difficulties maintaining contact with his eight-month-old child, after a separation from her mother. He was not included on the birth certificate, meaning that he had no parental rights, and as a result he felt overwhelmed and unsure about where to turn. With one-to-one support from Greg, one of the Dads Rock workers, Euan received guidance through a confusing and emotional court process. Greg helped him to rebuild communication with his child’s mother, and eventually she agreed to add him to the birth certificate, granting him parental rights and more stable access to his daughter. Euan then joined the dads and dice group, where he built friendships and confidence. In his own words:

“Attending Dads Rock’s dads night has me bonding with other dads and having a laugh.”

That is very important in life, with or without dad jokes. That is what meaningful, compassionate support for men looks like. It changes lives and strengthens families.

Dads Rock is not the only organisation doing this vital work. I pay tribute to Dr Ian Hounsome, whom I met in my office recently. Ian recently received a well-deserved award from Napier University for his extraordinary work supporting Andy’s Man Club. Ian first walked into Andy’s Man Club in 2021 fleeing an abusive relationship and looking for a sense of community. He soon became a volunteer and he now runs the club for the Edinburgh, Lothians and Borders area, supporting men at their lowest point. The recognition that he has received is well deserved, and the impact he is having on men across the region cannot be overstated. One of the big things in my life is parkrun. One of the people who organises parkrun in Edinburgh has really benefited from Andy’s Man Club, which is a great example of the work that Ian is doing and the impact it is having.

When we support men, their mental health, their relationships and their role as fathers, we strengthen our society. Organisations like Dads Rock and Andy’s Man Club show us what is possible when community, compassion and practical support come together. On the day after International Men’s Day, let us recognise these challenges, celebrate the men in our lives and the organisations driving change, and commit to ensuring that no man feels that he has to struggle alone.

World Stroke Day

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Tuesday 28th October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Uma Kumaran]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. Thrombectomy is highly effective and can transform recovery, massively reducing the chances of a disability. I hope that the Minister will respond to that point about care in my hon. Friend’s community.

Recent statistics show that while in London more than 10% of patients receive a thrombectomy, in the east of England, only 1% of stroke patients underwent this potentially lifesaving treatment. I apologise that I do not have the statistics for Scotland.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

[Uma Kumaran]

Does my hon. Friend have the statistics?

[Dr Arthur]

I do. I thank my hon. Friend for giving way, and wish her husband well—I am sure that he is incredibly proud of her. In Scotland in 2024, only 212 thrombectomies took place, which accounts for 2.2% of all eligible cases. Those are statistics that should shame us. If we compare it with Ireland, a comparably sized country, the number is five times higher. Does my hon. Friend agree that we can always do better?

[Uma Kumaran]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend, and thank him for having the statistics and always being a voice for Scotland. As we discussed, these inequalities have real-world consequences. Gaps in care and inequality in access jeopardise lives—in the most extreme cases they cost lives. While previous Governments have left stroke care underfunded and under-prioritised, I am proud to see this Labour Government tackling it head on. They are getting on with delivering the changes that we need to see so that the NHS can prevent strokes, and act fast when they strike, making the most of digital innovation, and delivering the best quality care for everyone as they recover.

While I am pleased to say that, after heart surgery this summer, Jacob is fully recovered, his stroke has absolutely transformed our family’s life—it changed it forever. But every day, hundreds of families across the UK face the same reality. That is why I can say that this Government’s target to slash stroke mortality in a decade is not just a statistic; it is lives saved and lives changed. I use this opportunity to thank the Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South West (Dr Ahmed), for both his professional and personal support to Jacob and I during this time in our lives. We will never forget his kindness and fast thinking.

I join hon. Members from across the House in calling on this Government to do all they can to ensure that their 10-year health plan delivers for stroke patients, no matter their age, postcode or what region they live in. Every stroke survivor must get the care that they need to thrive.

NHS Workforce Levels: Impact on Cancer Patients

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Thursday 23rd October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

You will not be surprised to hear, Mrs Hobhouse, that it is a pleasure to serve under you. I thank the hon. Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones) for securing this important debate. I declare an interest: my lovely wife has worked as part of the NHS workforce in Scotland for around 30 years, and on Monday she is due to start a one-year secondment to the Marie Curie hospice in Edinburgh, so I take this opportunity to wish her well. As I have more time to speak debate than expected, let me also take this opportunity to thank all the people in Edinburgh South West who raise money for that hospice, including BobCat Alpacas, which recently raised around £10,000 at its open day.

This morning I met with MacMillan Cancer support, as I am sure other Members did too. I want to recognise its efforts across the UK in supporting people facing a diagnosis, as well as recognising groups in my constituency such as The House of Hope, which supports people with a breast cancer diagnosis. We have to recognise the pressure that NHS staff are under—not just my lovely wife, but staff right across the NHS in the UK, although I will start by talking about England.

The pressure on the staff who are supporting cancer patients in the NHS is why I absolutely welcome the forthcoming workforce plan and the national cancer strategy. I hope they can make a real difference to staff and cancer patients in England. I am proud that it is a Labour Government that are showing real ambition—the word ambition is important here—but I support Cancer Research UK’s ask for a dedicated cancer workforce planning strategy. I also agree with Leukaemia UK that the 10-year workforce plan must enable and support the delivery of the national cancer plan. I am sure that is not a controversial view—it makes absolute sense.

I have been lucky to table a private Member’s Bill on rare cancers, and through that I have met many cancer charities. I have to say that all of them respect the work of the hon. Member for Wokingham—I am trying to find one that does not, but they all do. I recently met with Blood Cancer UK to talk about its work, and it informed me about this debate. I was asked to raise the situation in haematology in England, which is particularly concerning.

Blood cancer accounts for a third of cancer deaths in the UK, but Blood Cancer UK says that treatment is continuously impacted by staffing shortages. It told me about how one patient shared that they had had seven different consultants in the past five years, and they were terrified about not knowing who to contact if their symptoms got worse—not a great situation. Figures from Blood Cancer UK show that in south-east England the vacancies for advanced haematologist nurse practitioner roles are 111% greater than the numbers in post, so there are more vacancies than people in post. That impacts both patients and the staff in post, for whom it must be incredibly stressful.

I hope that in the upcoming workforce plan the Government recognise the central role that haematologists play in cancer care. We have to recognise that having a haematology workforce that is staffed to the correct level has benefits well beyond cancer care. I hope the Government will put measures in place to address the shortfalls. As the hon. Member for Wokingham said, steps to drive up the recruitment and retention of clinical nurses will be crucial.

Let me turn to Scotland, where of course health is devolved. Back in August, I welcomed the news that the risk of dying from cancer in Scotland had reached a record low, which is a fantastic landmark. However, the data only covered the period up to 2022. In 2025, cancer waiting times in Scotland have never been worse. The Royal College of Radiologists has indicated that, without addressing staffing, the situation will only get even worse. Right now, that seems unthinkable. Data shows that there is a 25% shortage of radiologists—again, a discipline that has benefits well beyond cancer care—and a 19% shortage of oncologists. One in five consultant haematologists are near retirement, and there is low recruitment into the sector, so patient groups are very concerned about what that means for the future.

The Scottish Government say that they are investing in cancer treatment, yet patients have been failed and left without effective care—that is the reality when we look beyond the press releases. Hon. Members do not have to take my word for it: Dr Iain Kennedy, who chairs the Scottish council of the British Medical Association, said that Scotland is now divided between people who can afford to go private and those forced to “languish” on NHS waiting lists. We often think about people going private for cosmetic work, or perhaps even hip surgery, but if people in Scotland, or anywhere, are going private for cancer care, that is a real inequality.

Cancer mortality rates for the poorest in Scotland are 78% higher than those for the richest. That shames me as a Scot, and I want change. The Scottish Government are failing to address the very low staffing levels that feed these issues. There is no workforce plan. The UK Government are currently looking at one, but there is none in Scotland. They actually had one, which expired in March this year. I checked it this morning, and it did not even mention cancer care. Perhaps that is why we have the worst cancer waiting times on record.

While the UK Government are taking action through the workforce plan, which I look forward to hearing more about from the Minister, the situation in Scotland looks like it can only get worse. We will have an election for the Holyrood Parliament next year. I hope that cancer care is a key part of the discussion, because it is in real crisis in Scotland. The country needs change. Our NHS needs change.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a real pleasure, as always, to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. I thank the hon. Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones) for raising this matter, which affects constituents in every part of this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. I always admire the hon. Gentleman because of the personal experiences with cancer that he tells us about. I have heard about them from him personally, but also in this Chamber. His heart is for those with cancer, and those who suffer and need to find a cure. I congratulate him on all he does.

As the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon) mentioned, the Macmillan coffee morning was this morning. Macmillan put forward some recommendations this morning, and I wonder whether the Minister has had an opportunity to have contact with the group. Macmillan is always helpful—it is not here to catch anybody out—and it was putting forward positive ideas on how to do things better. Perhaps the Minister can indicate whether that opportunity has come forward.

In this life, there are not many things that I say I hate—when I use that word, I mean it—but I do hate cancer. I hate the devastating effect it has on people and families. I hate that children suffer and that their parents can only stand by and watch, as happens on many occasions. I hate that children are left motherless or fatherless and that nothing can be done. I hate having to deal with that dreadful disease. But most of all I hate that we cannot cure it—at least, not yet.

One of my requests to the Minister, who is always incredibly helpful, is on research and development. Statistically, one in two people we meet—half the people in this room—will have cancer; 50% will survive, and 50% will not. The research and development is so important for getting to the day when we find a cure. I know the Minister is committed to that, and I hope she can give us some idea what is being done on that.

Each of us in this place will have been touched by cancer. I think of my own dad. My dad has been dead now for 10 years, but he was a cancer survivor on three occasions. He put that down—as I would as well—to the skill of the surgeon, the care of the nurses and the prayers of God’s people, which helped him get out the other side.

We can argue about microwaves, about preservatives in food and about genetic or carcinogenic factors, but this debate is about ensuring that NHS workforce levels enable every sufferer to have the best chance possible to fight cancer. As the hon. Member for Wokingham and others who have spoken have said, we are not there just yet. There are insufficient NHS workforce levels in Northern Ireland—I know that that is not the Minister’s responsibility, but I want to give a flavour. Things are not that different there; what happens in Northern Ireland happens in England, Wales and Scotland. If cancer patients have delayed diagnoses and treatments, that can lead to potentially life-threatening consequences and increased anxiety. First, people are anxious about their health, and then they are anxious about how to pay the bills: “Do I get benefits? Can I get some help to get me through? Can I get my mortgage extended?” People have to face up to really life-altering circumstances, and unmet support needs as well.

Then we have the shortages in key roles, such as specialist nurses, radiologists and surgeons. Unfortunately, that means that treatment targets are frequently missed and patients do not receive the full support they require during and after treatment. The situation is worsened by growing waiting lists, increased workloads for existing staff and a lack of resources for both acute and community-based care.

The hon. Member for Wokingham spoke about pancreatic cancer. Many cancers are devastating, but pancreatic cancer is one of the worst. In the last 10 days, a young lady from Greyabbey, a village close to where I live, died of pancreatic cancer. She was 31 years of age, with a five-year-old son and a partner. I remember others. When pancreatic cancer is diagnosed, it is too late, because it has already taken effect and the body is already succumbing to that terrible cancer. That is why I go back to research and development. Will we find the cure for pancreatic cancer someday? Will we be able to diagnose it at an earlier stage so that we can give the treatment and help that are needed?

[Dr Arthur]

I know that this subject is important to the hon. Gentleman. Pancreatic Cancer UK is a fantastic charity. Unfortunately, he could not make this year’s Labour party conference in Liverpool, although he is always welcome to attend—Labour MPs go free, so he is welcome to join up. However, Pancreatic Cancer UK was there with scientists who are looking at a new diagnostic tool that, believe it or not, is based on a breath test. They can analyse a small particle in our breath to give an indication of whether there could be something that needs further investigation. That is a great example of how investment can help to save lives while bringing jobs to the UK. I am sure the hon. Gentleman will congratulate Pancreatic Cancer UK on all its work in this field, and on that little piece of progress.

[Jim Shannon]

I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s encouraging intervention. That is what it is all about. Of course, I attend my own party’s conference—I am not sure I would attend anyone else’s. Party conferences are a great opportunity to meet groups that are working hard, and they come to our conference too. That breath test is encouraging, and perhaps it will be part of the next stage of curing cancer, and particularly pancreatic cancer.

The target of starting treatment within 62 days of an urgent GP referral is not being met, with only 37% of patients receiving treatment within the critical window—those figures are from 2023. As of September 2023, some 545,000 people in Northern Ireland, which has a population of 1.95 million, were waiting for elective care. My goodness, is that not a scary figure? That issue is not the Minister’s responsibility, but it worries me when I consider it. It is the highest number on record. Waiting times for in-patient admissions and out-patient appointments, including for cancer patients, have increased dramatically since 2020.

There are shortages across multiple disciplines, including paediatricians, administrative support, pathologists, radiologists, chemotherapy nurses and palliative care staff. For example, while the number of clinical radiologists has increased, which is good news, the Royal College of Radiologists estimates that the workforce is still 50% smaller than is needed to meet demand. Yes, there have been advances, but we are not there quite yet. Current staff face extreme workload pressures, leading to a fear of missing early diagnoses, and also burnout for those whose commitment to help their patients is above and beyond what their wage packet might indicate.

We are not coping well. A constituent came to my office to ask why her first smear test results took 16 weeks to come back, and why she had to ring her GP on three occasions to get them. On her behalf, I had to email the doctor’s surgery and the health trust so that the biopsies were taken. It is easy to understand why her anxiety levels were through the roof. She now has to wait a further six to eight weeks to see whether she needs treatment. My goodness, it is little wonder that people are so worried, anxious and stressed.

The fact is that waiting times affect the mental health of even the young and the fit. If we are to give people the tools they need to win their health battle, as we need to, it begins with efficient diagnosis and treatment. We are not getting it right, and that is a fact. We can do better. Our constituents believe they are losing the battle before it truly begins, so what do we need to do? We need to bring our workforce up to par by ensuring that money in the NHS is spent appropriately and is not, to use an Ulster Scots word, frittered away.

I make a plea to the Minister for more research. I really believe that what we spend on research will be for the future and finding all the cures. If we go back a few years, only one in three people survived cancer; now it is one in two. That is an advance, and perhaps the day is coming when everyone can be in that place. I think of Queen’s University Belfast as one example. Its partnerships with medical companies to find cures are incredible, and those that it has found through its research are some of the best in the United Kingdom, if not the world.

To conclude, our NHS staff are second to none, but at times they seem to be working with one hand tied behind their backs, and that must cease. We must ensure we have sufficient funding to free them up to do the job and to fight cancer throughout this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland—always better together.

Rare Cancers Bill

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Report stage
Friday 11th July 2025 Commons Chamber

Madam Deputy Speaker, that is a succinct summary of the points I am making and why I tabled those amendments. One or two people—out of ignorance, frankly—have written to me suggesting that I have something other than their best interests at heart. I do have their best interests at heart, which I why I am putting forward these amendments. I hope I will get a positive response from the Government.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

I rise to oppose the amendments, but I thank the hon. Member for Christchurch (Sir Christopher Chope) for tabling them, for engaging with the Bill and for our conversation yesterday, which I really appreciated. I understand the stated intent of the proposals, although I am not minded to support them.

Over the last 10 months, I have held dozens of meetings with families, survivors, sufferers, charities, clinicians and legal experts, all with the aim of delivering meaningful change in this field. Those meetings were not so that I could tell people about the Bill, but so that those people could shape the Bill. I fear that if we were to pass these amendments, they would upset the delicate balance of hopes and aspirations that underpins the Bill. It is not just about the Minister, as the hon. Member suggested; there is a whole coalition of people who have different opinions about the Bill, and I do not think any one person has a right to change it in that way, including me. That would be hugely disrespectful and a disappointment to that coalition, but I understand the hon. Member’s points.

The Minister will go through the amendments in turn, so I will focus on three key ones. The review of orphan drugs was one of the hardest-fought things in the negotiations with the Department and charities, but we found a point that we could all agree on. I appreciate that the hon. Member wants it to go further, and perhaps we could speculate about the outcome and better prepare for it, but it is much awaited by the charities and they are grateful for it. I do not want to speak on their behalf, but that is what I have heard from them. That covers amendments 1 and 2.

Amendment 5 is about the definition of a rare cancer, which is an aspect of the Bill that I have not spoken about in any great detail, so it is worth touching on here. The Bill sets the definition of a rare cancer in statute and aligns it with the definition of a rare disease, which is a useful simplification. In future, let us hope that some conditions fall out of that “rare” specification and need less emphasis, and let us also hope that people in the Department look at the treatments that are being developed inside and outside the UK. It is right that there should be a bit of flexibility at the edges of what the Department considers a rare cancer.

The timeline of the review is three years. Again, we spent a great deal of time talking about that. For some while, it was going to be much longer than three years, and all of us want it to be much shorter, but that was the compromise we reached—it was like “Goldilocks and the Three Bears”. We reached that compromise together, so I urge the hon. Member to respect our negotiations on that issue.

[Sir Christopher Chope]

I hear what the hon. Member is saying, but why does the impact assessment say that the costs are for staff for only one year? If the review will take three years, why are the staff funded for only one?

[Dr Arthur]

I thank the hon. Member for that question. Of course, the review will not start on day one after passing the Bill. It will take time to get up and running. The existing workload of those staff members will have to be reallocated, and I hope and expect there to be some initial engagement with the sector—both charities and pharmaceutical companies—so a bit of flexibility is required. To be honest, I would love more money to be spent on that review so that we can get more depth and it can have a greater impact. I am sure other hon. Members present would agree.

I hope the hon. Member for Christchurch understands my position and recognises the strength of cross-party and sector-wide support that has brought the Bill this far. I regret not inviting him to take part in the Bill Committee—we would have benefited from some of these comments at that stage—but some of the points that have been raised were discussed in Committee. It was a reasonably long discussion; it did not last for hours, but it was not as short as some. I remain committed to working constructively with colleagues as the Bill progresses beyond today—let us hope it gets beyond today—but I respectfully ask, in the strongest possible terms, that these amendments are not pressed. If they are, I hope Members will oppose them.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Arthur]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.

What a joy it is to say that! Madam Deputy Speaker, it has been 10 months since you pulled my little ping-pong ball out of the goldfish bowl and I started this journey. It is worth remembering that part of the reason behind this Bill was the death of my father-in-law to a rare cancer type called glioblastoma. I am forever grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) for the information she gave me about that condition and how it impacts so many people, because I had always just been focused on my father-in-law.

When the ping-pong ball was pulled out of the goldfish bowl, I got so many emails, many of which were about glioblastoma. The reality is that someone who was diagnosed that day with glioblastoma would more than likely be dead by now—that is how serious the condition is. They would face treatments that were out of date, and their future would be dominated by uncertainty. We should not forget why we are here: to change that reality for people and their families.

This Bill has resonated with many Members of this House and with many people in my constituency. On Second Reading, I shared the tragic stories of a young constituent called Tilly, who passed away from neuroblastoma, and Kira, who has lived with the same condition for a decade—half of her life. I am proud to wear the Solving Kids’ Cancer badge, which Kira’s mother Aud gave me when I last met her.

Today, I also want to acknowledge the many people from across the UK—not just voters in Edinburgh South West—who have contacted me to voice their support and share their stories. One lady travelled quite far to meet me at my constituency surgery in July in Tesco in Colinton Mains. Her daughter was diagnosed with a sarcoma. In Tesco, next to the bleeping self-checkout aisles, she told me about the uncertainty she had faced after that diagnosis and how she had found it impossible even to understand which trials were available, let alone access them. I could see that she had felt powerless and had lost hope. The other reason she was in Edinburgh—perhaps the most important reason—was that she was meeting her ex-husband to scatter her daughter’s ashes in a local park. What is happening to people who face these conditions is quite incredible, so it is right that we seek to address them.

It has been incredible to hear these stories, and when I reflect on them, I can see that there are three recurring themes. The first is frustration. As things stand, our NHS is ill equipped to deal with these patients. Awareness levels are often low among clinicians, which leads to the scourge of late diagnosis. I know that will be addressed in the cancer plan. Families and patients are also frustrated by the limited access to cutting-edge trials—I have already given an example of that. As a result, many rare cancer patients understandably feel like they have to battle not just against the cancer but for attention.

The second key thing that unites these stories is perseverance. Rare cancer patients continually push back and advocate for the changes that they believe must happen—often fundraising or even setting up and running their own charities to help to achieve those goals. Thirdly, each and every story concludes with an offer of help. Rather than asking what I can do for them, because often rare cancer patients know that their options are limited, they want to know what they can do to help with the Bill, help others with the same condition, and help to make this legislation a reality. I believe that is a testament to the transformational role that the Bill could have, and I thank Members who have already made that point.

For far too long, rare cancer patients have been left behind—as medical science makes significant progress in many other complex fields, we have not seen enough progress in this one—but they feel this piece of legislation could mark a meaningful shift for many and turn out to be life-altering, perhaps even lifesaving, for some. There is one statistic that I often mention: rare cancers are not really rare, as they account for 47% of all cancer diagnoses in the UK each year. That equates to 180,000 people. If you are one of those 47%, two things are true: you are more likely to face outdated treatments and you are more likely to die.

The Bill is about justice and creating a more level playing field for those patients and their families. It will achieve that by placing a duty on the Secretary of State to promote research into rare cancers, including appointing a national specialty lead to co-ordinate efforts across the sector. If anybody doubts the need for that, I am sure my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden can talk about what has been happening in recent years. The Bill will also increase patient access to clinical trials by strengthening and streamlining the Be Part of Research registry and building a central database of willing patients to help researchers to find trial participants more easily. That is key to attracting trials to the UK.

Lastly, the Bill will trigger a Government review into orphan drugs—I really dislike that phrase; this is about rare conditions—to explore new pathways to incentivise pharmaceutical companies to trial repurposed and innovative treatments for rare cancers. Together, those steps will reduce the barriers to research and attract more trials to the UK, and ultimately lead to faster and fairer access to lifesaving treatments.

I am a humble person, and do not want to be accused of overstating the impact of the Bill, so I will take the liberty of quoting others, if Members do not mind. The Brain Tumour Charity, which has been so helpful, says that the Bill will be transformative and help to

“improve access to clinical trials for people living with rare and less common cancers”.

Another helpful charity, Brain Tumour Research, said that the Bill

“could significantly improve research and treatment pathways for patients.”

Pancreatic Cancer UK, which has been at the core of what we are doing—and, it turns out, has been in correspondence with the hon. Member for Christchurch (Sir Christopher Chope)—says that if the Bill

“becomes law, it has the potential to improve survival rates for pancreatic cancer and other cancers that have been left behind.”

I know the hon. Member for Witney (Charlie Maynard) wanted to be here today but could not be. Instead, his sister Georgie left a message on my social media. She lives with glioblastoma and is a fantastic campaigner in this field. She said:

“Your Bill will make a significant difference, helping tens of thousands who desperately need more research to find a cure.”

No pressure, therefore, for me or us in the Chamber today.

There is also a strong economic argument for introducing this legislation. By creating the conditions for more rare cancer trials to take place in the UK, we can attract investment, stimulate innovation and create new jobs in research, science and healthcare. This is an opportunity to give British science and institutions a global leadership role in tackling some of the most challenging diseases of our time.

I recently had the pleasure of visiting Edinburgh University researchers based in an NHS hospital, the Western general in Edinburgh. I was invited along to see a thing called a robotic microscope. It sounded exciting, and I was looking forward to getting my picture taken next to it, but it is actually a very ordinary piece of instrumentation. I got my picture taken in the end, but I do not think I used it.

It is a fantastic piece of equipment, and it is coupled with a supercomputer. It does what would previously have been a lifetime of analysis in just a few days. It is fantastic that in this House, we have all agreed that Edinburgh University should get a new supercomputer. Analysis that used to take a few days will take just a few hours, moving us closer to finding cures. The United States has shown how investment in this area can stimulate growth through its cancers Act. It would offer a real step change in the UK if we could do the same.

I will draw to a conclusion, because I know others want to speak. There is a strong moral and economic argument for this Bill, and the progress within it is long overdue.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Arthur]

With the leave of the House, I thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and hon. Members who have contributed to the debate. I will not thank them all as I want to keep an eye on the time, but I will single out my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) for helping me to start out on this journey. When I first met her, I thought she was driven by grief at the loss of her sister, but I now know that she is driven by her love for her sister. That is an important difference. I also thank the many people who used the debate to celebrate the life of Dr Susan Michaelis and who continue to support the lobular moonshot project that she left behind. We wish them well. I am sure that we will keep her family in our minds today.

I thank the DHSC civil servants, some of whom are with us today, for their support throughout the Bill’s passage. I must also pay tribute to the Minister for his support, as well as the Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton)—we all know who she is—for the comprehensive backing that she has provided throughout. I was at an event on Monday with both the pharmaceutical industry and some of the charities supporting the Bill, and they all have huge respect for the work she is doing.

I really thank the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans) for his supportive comments on behalf of the Opposition, which went well beyond what I thought was reasonable. [Interruption.] I was trying to phrase that in the proper way. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bury South (Christian Wakeford) for whipping us all on these Friday mornings and helping us along the way—just as he enters the Chamber.

I must also thank the many charities who have been at the centre of this process. There are somewhere between 30 and 40 of them, and I mentioned the key ones earlier. Many hon. Members said—quite politely—that they had received quite a lot of emails over the last few days, perhaps stimulated by the submission of amendments to the Bill. I think that the charities sent about 120,000 emails this week, which is incredible. As hon. Members can imagine, my inbox is a bit of a mess just now, but that tells us how important the Bill is for them. They have waited a long time for this opportunity, and I really thank them for urging me along.

I must also thank Sonia from H/Advisors Cicero for her help in recent weeks as we approached Committee and as we have started to think about the transition to the Lords with some optimism. She and her husband Dan have been fantastic. I must also thank my team in my office for the support they have given me. I thank in particular Noel and Tommy but also Lucie, Hannah, Salim, Maisie, Joe, Xavier and Evie—that is quite a long list of names because we have a slightly complicated situation with our interns just now.

I look forward to the Bill’s continued support. I hope that it will pass today. As has been outlined, when it—hopefully—reaches the House of Lords, it will be in the safe hands of a formidable woman; I have great confidence in her.

First and foremost, I thank residents in Edinburgh South West for electing me and giving me the chance to bring the Bill forward. I did not know it at the time, but without their electing me, I would not be standing here to champion the Bill. I look forward to it receiving support today and to continuing to champion it as it moves to the other place.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read the Third time and passed.

Rare Cancers Bill

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Committee stage
Wednesday 2nd July 2025 Public Bill Committees

[The Chair]

With this it will be convenient to consider clauses 2 to 6 stand part.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart. I was happy with the unanimous cross-party support that the Bill received on Second Reading and look forward to examining it in detail today.

The term “rare cancer” might imply that this is a relatively niche issue that is unlikely to have an impact on many of us, but the reality is that 47% of cancers diagnosed in the UK fall within the “rare and less common” category, and they account for 55% of all cancer deaths. That second statistic is partly due to the survival rate—five out of six less survivable cancers are also rare cancers—but survivability is not just a function of the aggressiveness of the cancer. It also depends on the treatment options available, and for less survivable cancers the options are limited. They receive a mere fraction—roughly 16%—of the funding that more survivable cancers receive.

At this point, I should clarify that I have had some contact with a charity that represents younger people. It is the case that the Bill covers younger people and that all childhood cancers are rare.

The situation is unlikely to change without Government intervention. Markets encourage pharmaceutical companies to prioritise the highest return on investment. Inevitably, that favours the development of drugs with the largest potential patient pools. When a company does pursue taking a rare cancer drug to market, having to access a limited patient pool can make the creation of sufficiently robust studies and trials a struggle.

The Bill is an attempt to intervene on behalf of patients and their families, and to enable pharmaceutical companies and the Government to re-evaluate the strategies for funding, research and finding treatments. It has been drafted carefully in consultation with a wide range of cancer charities—I am pleased to see a few of them represented in the Public Gallery—and expert bodies. The Bill reflects the solutions that scientists, doctors and those with lived experience think are necessary.

In practical terms, by passing this legislation we can, first, remove the barriers to participation in potentially lifesaving clinical trials; secondly, drive investment in under-resourced yet vital drugs and treatments; and thirdly, enhance connectivity between various organisations and individuals working to find cures. That last one is an incredibly important point. I have attended many meetings of the all-party parliamentary group on brain tumours, chaired by my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden; we often we see that those connections are not being made, and we all lose as a result.

Clause 1 will enable regulations to be made that compel the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to conduct a review of the marketing authorisations for orphan medicinal products for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of cancer, and to prepare and publish a report setting out the conclusions of that review. I have never been a great fan of the term orphan drugs, which refers to drugs for rare conditions. The clause provides that the review process will specifically consider the regulatory approaches adopted in other countries. That will help to avoid research and patients in this country losing out.

The clause sets a timeframe for the publication of the report, namely within three years of the Bill being passed. We consulted broadly on that three-year point. We obviously all want to see progress on this issue as quickly as possible, but we have to balance that against the need for the review to be authoritative and impactful. That is where the three-year duration comes from, but I recognise that some people want it to move faster. A review of best practice at international level should surface a variety of effective strategies that the Government could consider implementing to drive pharmaceutical industry investment into lifesaving research and treatments.

Clause 2 will enable regulations to be made that will encourage the Secretary of State to facilitate, or otherwise promote, research into rare cancers. The clause will specify that the Secretary of State must ensure that arrangements are in place that will, first, enable potential participants in clinical trials to be identified and contacted, and secondly, ensure that a person—to be known as the national speciality lead for rare cancers—is appointed to promote and facilitate research into rare cancers. That person will hold an advisory and facilitatory role, offering input on the design and planning of research, as well as building collaborative networks between key bodies and individuals. Appointing a specific individual to hold that role will provide a structure for greater accountability and a more strategic approach for the delivery of rare cancer research across different organisations.

Clause 3 will enable regulations to be made that will facilitate data sharing in the context of contacting and identifying potential participants in clinical trials that are focused on orphan medicinal products for the diagnosis, prevention and/or treatment of rare cancers. The clause does not authorise the processing of information that would contravene existing data protection legislation. The twin benefits to enhanced data sharing are a greater access to clinical trials for patients, which could be lifesaving, and more higher-quality trials taking place in the UK as a result of a larger potential participant population for researchers.

Clause 4 explains the territorial extent of the various clauses. Clauses 2 and 3 will extend to England and Wales only, while the remainder of the Bill extends to England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Where the Bill does not extend to the entirety of the UK, we have been assured by the devolved Governments, which were consulted during the Bill’s formulation—I thank Department of Health and Social Care colleagues for that—that they will work alongside us to achieve the policy goals it outlines within the context of their unique legal landscapes. In that regard, I acknowledge the work of the hon. Member for South Antrim to ensure that Northern Ireland generally, and his constituents specifically, benefit from the Bill.

Clause 5 will provide for commencement, which will occur two months after the Bill is passed, and clause 6 provides the short title for the Bill.

I hope the Bill has real impact, because so many people in the charity sector and elsewhere are working so hard to raise often small amounts of money, which they hope will have a big impact. I hope the Bill amplifies their work and helps it to go further. I look forward to Committee members’ contributions to the discussion of this important Bill, and I commend the clauses to the Committee.

[Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart. I thank and congratulate the hon. Member for Edinburgh South West on bringing forward this private Member’s Bill, which will have life-changing effects for many individuals across the entirety of the United Kingdom. I applaud him for it, because I know some of the driving reasons behind him doing that.

I have a couple of points to make about the Bill. I am fully supportive of it, but I note the geographical challenge it brings. The Northern Ireland Assembly passed a legislative consent motion for clause 1 on Monday, so we are already stepping into line for this legislation. Much of the relevant work was discussed in the Northern Ireland cancer strategy, which was published in 2022 when I was Minister of Health there. It looked at our specific challenges with regard to research and clinical trials. At that point, cancer charities highlighted that only 15% of cancer patients in Northern Ireland are offered the opportunity to take part in cancer trials, compared with 31% across the rest of the UK. I hope the Bill increases awareness among Northern Ireland patients and cancer sufferers, and their families, of what is out there and their ability to take part.

The other concern often raised by some of my Northern Ireland colleagues—you are aware of this, Mr Stuart—is the EU implications. I can state that novel treatments do not fall under the scope of the EU, so hopefully any medication, treatment or supply that comes forward will be equally accessible and applicable to the entirety of Northern Ireland. The only difficulty and challenge we have in progressing the Bill’s other provisions is the legislation that allows Northern Ireland to use secondary data for cancer registries. I am aware that the current Health Minister in Northern Ireland, who is my party colleague, has a one-clause Bill ready to move forward to rectify that.

I wanted to make that small contribution in support of the work done by the hon. Member for Edinburgh South West in bringing forward the Bill. It has been a pleasure to serve on this Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Ashley Dalton]

I can confirm that the overall objective of the whole cancer plan will be saving lives and reducing the number of lives lost to cancer, including rare cancers. The plan will be published later this year.

It is important to note that the Bill is specific to cancer; there will be opportunities to discuss other rare conditions in the future. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South West for presenting the Bill, and I pay tribute to the charities that are backing him, some of which I had the pleasure to meet recently to discuss further how the Government can better support people with rare cancers. Together, we will improve outcomes for people across our country, and I look forward to working with everybody to get that done.

[Dr Arthur]

I am grateful for all the contributions to debate. The charity partners carefully picked the Committee members, given their interest in this subject, and we can see the benefit of that.

I thank the hon. Member for South Antrim for his efforts to make sure that the legislation works in Northern Ireland. I am also grateful for the comments from the hon. Member for Wokingham and my hon. Friend the Member for Calder Valley, who both asked for more progress in this area generally.

Of course, I have to mention my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden. I attended the reception yesterday evening and, first and foremost, it was a fantastic celebration of her sister’s fantastic life. We should be grateful for her. I wish Paul Mulholland and his team all the best with that trial. It really did fill me with hope to hear that update from him.

My hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden mentioned marathons, so at this point I have to mention my daughter, Ruth Arthur, who ran the marathon in Edinburgh for the Brain Tumour Charity and raised just over £3,000 in the memory of her grandfather. I am very proud of her.

I am grateful for the shadow Minister’s comments and the insight and depth of thinking she brought to the debate. One of the best things about this journey has been working with the DHSC team who are working on the cancer strategy, and seeing how much they care about getting this right. We have often reflected on the point that the shadow Minister made about diagnosis. Too often when we go to events in this place hosted by charities that include somebody with life experience, late diagnosis is where their story starts. It is often avoidable. It is fantastic that the DHSC cancer team acknowledge that. Hopefully our GPs in particular will get more support to make sure that the early signs are not missed and the dots are joined together. It is good to see the Minister nodding vigorously as I say that. I thank her for her leadership right across this policy area and for her support for the Bill in particular.

I thank all Committee members for coming along today and contributing, and I thank the civil servants who helped to draft the Bill. If it passes—and I really hope it does—it will incentivise and create an environment in which more research into rare cancers is fostered, potentially helping us to save, in the longer term, perhaps thousands of lives. What an aspiration that is. I once again commend the Bill to the Committee.

Clause 1 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 2 to 6 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill to be reported, without amendment.

Spending Review: Health and Social Care

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Thursday 12th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Karin Smyth]

I have a slight “get out of jail free” card, because I think that letter might be with one of my colleagues, not with me. Obviously, though, I look forward to the summary.

The hon. Gentleman makes a really important point about cancer. I would have to check, but I do not think I mentioned lots of disease-specific areas, including key manifesto commitments such as dentistry. Obviously, cancer is a huge part of waiting lists overall. We will get those waiting lists down—we are determined to meet that target—and we will issue a cancer plan later in the year.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

I thank the Minister for supporting the launch of Sarcoma UK’s report yesterday. The recommendations in that report are really important for tackling that awful rare cancer.

I welcome the ambition in what has been presented, but the comparison with what my Edinburgh South West constituents face in Scotland could not be more stark. I have just come from a meeting in which, yet again, I have been trying to defend the mental health provision at Scottish Action for Mental Health’s Redhall walled garden; in contrast, I hear from the Dispatch Box real ambition to support people with mental health problems. People in Scotland are also jealous of the falling waiting lists they see in England, and hope that one day, they will arrive in Scotland. May I ask the Minister to keep on being ambitious, in the hope—because hope is all I have—that some of it will rub off on the Scottish Government?

As Madam Deputy Speaker is feeling a little generous, may I also say that Saturday will mark the 200th Oriam parkrun in my constituency? If we are serious about preventative healthcare activities, parkrun is a great example of how we can improve both our mental health and our physical health. The Minister is welcome to attend, of course.

[Karin Smyth]

I always shudder a little when I am invited to do any running, jogging, boxing or whatever else people get up to—we all have our own things we like doing. Although my hon. Friend’s fabulous city is a great place to be, I will not be able to join in this weekend, but I wish good luck to everybody taking part.

We all live in hope that the SNP might learn some lessons from what we are doing to fix our NHS. We remain willing to work with the SNP, and with anybody who wants to serve patients and get a better service for their taxes. If the SNP wants to get in touch, it can do so, but the best thing to do is to elect a Labour Government in Scotland, which will hopefully happen soon.

My hon. Friend makes an important point about mental health. We are committed, as we said in our manifesto, to 8,500 more people working in mental health, and to ensure that our schools and young people have the support they deserve.

Covid: Fifth Anniversary

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Thursday 12th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham and Beckton (James Asser) for securing the debate and for his tribute to public service workers.

We should never forget that in places like Edinburgh, everyone—from bus drivers to bin lorry drivers— took huge risks at the start of the pandemic because the consequences and transmission of the virus were not understood. At this point, I must mention my lovely wife, who worked in end-of-life care as a nurse all the way through, as well as the fantastic Hannah in my office, who worked in a care home.

Covid has not disappeared. The fantastic covid memorial wall across the river from this building tells us that. The number of hearts on it is slowly growing. I hope that, when she responds, the Minister will give us an update on any plans to make the memorial permanent and acknowledge the fantastic work of the friends of the wall.

Covid has not gone away yet. In one week alone in Scotland last year, 443 people were hospitalised with covid. Long covid is now just as prevalent as strokes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and atrial fibrillation.

[Lloyd Hatton (South Dorset) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for bringing up long covid. The organisation Long Covid Kids, which was founded by my constituent Sammie McFarland, highlights the experience of young people with long covid. Does he agree that we must ensure we give long covid the consideration it needs alongside other illnesses when we develop health policy, even though we are five years on from the pandemic?

[Dr Arthur]

Absolutely. I hope I will be able to expand on that in the time I have remaining, but that organisation sounds fantastic, so I thank my hon. Friend for mentioning it.

One of the most powerful things about being an MP is the people we meet, particularly in our constituencies. One of those people is Sophie, who attended my surgery in the fantastic Fountainbridge library. Her story starkly portrays the reality of living with long covid. Sophie enjoyed a full and active life before the pandemic. She used to run to her office in the mornings, where she oversaw a small, dedicated team of designers—I am sure she was not too sweaty after her run to work. She now relies on a wheelchair to get around and is largely housebound. She says,

“I am desperate to get back to my career and live again”,

but doctors have been unable to help her.

Sophie is one of a small but growing number of constituents who write to me with stories that highlight the seemingly irreversible impact that a covid infection has had on their lives. With no proven treatments or a cure in sight, we cannot afford to treat covid as old news. We need to keep talking about it, and particularly about those people who are suffering from long covid. It should not be an economic argument, but the impact of long covid on our economy is significant: it is estimated to cost us £4.2 billion up to 2030.

As long as treatment options remain limited and new patients continue to join the thousands already grappling with long covid on a daily basis, we need to do just three things to help them and reduce the burden on our NHS: we need to empathise with those who have this condition and treat it seriously—too often, they are seen as working the system, and I know through the people I have met that that is completely untrue; we need to invest in new trials and research; and we need to recognise that while the threat of covid may have diminished, we have to take it seriously and ensure that vulnerable groups are vaccinated.

Eating Disorder Awareness

Scott Arthur Excerpts

Tuesday 1st April 2025 Westminster Hall

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under you, Mr Stuart. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse). When I was elected last year, I cared about eating disorders, but through her work on the APPG I have really come to understand them much more.

I pay tribute to the secretariat, Hope Virgo—it is almost insulting to describe her as the secretariat, because she is such a powerhouse and really cares about this issue. I made the mistake of doubting the ambition of the APPG but, through the hon. Member for Bath and through Hope, we have made fantastic progress. Through them, I was shocked to find out that people are entering palliative care because of eating disorders. That is a disgrace and a sign that the whole system is failing the people—largely young people—facing this disease. I hope the Minister acknowledges that that is unacceptable.

I am a Scottish MP, so I want to talk a bit about Scotland, where the situation is just as stressed as it is in England, but I will end with a slight glimmer of hope. Since I was elected last July, I have met people in Edinburgh South West who face eating disorders. I met a parent whose daughter had waited months for a consultation. They were filled with hope as the date arrived, only to find out that it was just a triaging slot to decide whether she should be referred to formal treatment months later.

I met a parent whose daughter had been admitted to hospital and was released over a few days to see whether she could cope at home. She could not, but when she was taken back after the weekend, she was told that the bed space had gone, and that left the family in absolute crisis.

I am not surprised that there is pressure on admissions. The number of people admitted in Scotland has increased substantially since 2007, and almost doubled during covid, so the system in Scotland is under real pressure. I spoke to the chief executive of my local NHS board about that, and she described the state of eating disorder treatment in the Lothians as at the absolute minimum acceptable level. I think we know what that means for many families.

I then contacted the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care—Scotland’s equivalent of my right hon. Friend the Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting), if Members can imagine that—and he replied with lots of talk about frameworks, strategies and something alarming called a flexible funding stream, which did not fill me with too much hope. He outlined that the Scottish Government commissioned a review in 2020, and in 2024 created a template for eating disorder treatment that they can roll out across the country. I am slightly wary about that, because in Scotland we have lots of fantastic policies but implementation is often the issue—[Interruption.] I see Members nodding; they are well aware of that. Just £5 million has been allocated to the implementation of the strategy; none the less, it fills me with hope.

The eating disorder strategy must build on mental health provision for young people that is fit for purpose. In Scotland, about 10% of young people wait more than 18 weeks after referral for their first mental health appointment. The number of young people treated for mental health issues in Scotland has dropped by 15%, so there are massive waiting lists but the treatment pace is dropping. Currently, about 4,000 people are waiting for treatment. This year, this Government set aside the biggest ever settlement for Scotland, and a large amount of that money has rightly been allocated to the NHS. I really hope that some of that money trickles down to mental health provision for young people, and specifically for eating disorders.