Bell Ribeiro-Addy
MP for Clapham and Brixton Hill · Labour · United Kingdom
“The hon. Member will know that, with the extreme heat and reduced rainfall, a lot of water companies are introducing hosepipe bans to mitigate the risk of drought. Does he agree that that seems a bit redundant, given that artificial intelligence data centres use between 11 million and 19 million litres of water a day?”
“This Bill seems inspired by the belief that hostility towards asylum seekers will deter them, whereas hostility towards migrants will not deter those we need economically, but we cannot have it both ways. There is a deeper problem with the Bill’s logic on citizenship provisions.”
“This appears to be blurred with a separate Bill that stops citizenship being restored after the first successful appeal, letting this Government sound tougher than they are while avoiding scrutiny of a power that is already used disproportionately against black, Asian and migrant-heritage citizens.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. First, I will acknowledge that although I disagree with the premise of this petition, I recognise the strength of feeling among the hundreds of thousands of people who signed it.”
“The petition that we are debating today raises the issue of asylum seekers being held in hotels and temporary accommodation. I certainly agree that that is unacceptable; I have seen for myself the diabolical conditions in such accommodation.”
“Automatic deportation for custodial sentences introduces double jeopardy; a wrongful sentence can now also mean unjust deportation. The deportation system is already a mess and is run by the Home Office, which is now asking for sole control of it, without oversight.”
The complete record
Every one of 600 lines we hold for Bell Ribeiro-Addy, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 12.
“MBRRACE-UK’s 2023 comparison of care for black and white women who have experienced stillbirth or neonatal death found that the majority of all significant issues were identified in antenatal care for 83% of black women, compared with 69% of white women; 67% of black mothers and babies had a major or significant issue related to pathology, compared with 46% of white mothers and babies; and 75% of black parents and 66% of white parents had significant issues identified during the follow-up or reviews of their and their baby's care. Public Health England’s 2020 report found that prematurity is a major cause of long-term infant morbidity. Black mothers, particularly those of black Caribbean background, are twice as likely to give birth before 37 weeks.”
“The disparities in maternity care are evident not only in maternal mortality statistics, which show that black and mixed heritage women are three times more likely to die during pregnancy or childbirth as white women, and Asian women twice as likely, but in many other areas. Miscarriage rates are 40% higher in black women, and black ethnicity is now regarded as a risk factor for miscarriage.”
“While I am sure it is not the intention to focus on that, it can give the impression that, because the UK is broadly safe, the negative experiences of some women are exceptional and not matters that require significant Government attention. When we detail some of the harrowing experiences of women and hear that response, it can feel as though our concerns are being minimalised, so I hope the Minister will appreciate that I have got that part out of the way. While the UK is among the safest places to give birth, it is by no means perfect, and for many women it is deadly. As always, it is vital to lay out the current state of affairs.”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered Black Maternal Health Week 2025. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. Before I get to the crux of this debate, I want to begin by saying that the UK is one of the safest countries in the world for a woman to give birth. I say that at the outset not to diminish the importance of this debate, but to move beyond that platitude—because in the sixth largest economy in the world, this should be one of the safest places to give birth. It is important that we move beyond that and focus on the real and persistent inequalities facing black and minority ethnic women in maternity care.”
“Five X More also advocates for mandatory annual maternity surveys focused on black women’s experiences, compulsory anti-racism and cultural competence training for all maternity professionals, and improved data collection on ethnicity and outcomes.”
“First—always first—I commend Five X More, which established Black Maternal Health Awareness Week in 2019. Its work empowers black women to make informed decisions during pregnancy, and it advocates for systemic change. It is currently conducting its second national survey, building on its impactful 2022 research. Five X More is calling for a measurable Government target to end racial disparities in maternal death, a commitment that the Labour Government support but have yet to implement. I hope that the Minister will confirm today whether such a target will be set, how it will be measured and when we can expect it.”
“The combination of socioeconomic inequalities and institutional racism in the NHS is having a dual impact on black mothers’ experiences of maternity care and health outcomes. Much of the previous Government’s work to improve maternity care was focused on co-morbidities and socioeconomic drivers of poor health. Indeed, it is crucial that those areas are addressed, but without looking at the structural racism and unconscious bias in the NHS, the problems will persist. I want to recognise the campaign groups that are pushing the issue up the political agenda. In the absence of concrete Government or NHS action, advocacy groups have stepped in to offer their solutions and recommendations. Where they can, they also offer alternative care and training.”
“Those beliefs are not taught in medical school or during training, yet so many black women have come across a nurse, midwife or doctor who holds them. They are a direct result of institutional racism in the NHS and have a direct impact on the care that women receive. It is important to note that, although racial disparities in maternity care are experienced regardless of class, occupation, education or geography, socioeconomic inequalities are still a very important factor in determining health outcomes and experiences. Women living in the most deprived areas have a maternal mortality rate more than twice that of women living in the least deprived areas. Black and minority ethnic people are 2.5 times more likely to be in relative poverty and 2.2 times more likely to live in deep poverty.”
“There is no one driver of the racial disparities in maternity care and outcomes. The causes are multifaceted, but overwhelmingly they are the result of a combination of structural racism, unconscious bias, gaps in culturally competent care and socioeconomic inequalities. The first two are incredibly important to highlight. Without acknowledging that the NHS has an issue with institutional racism and unconscious bias, we cannot address the problem. Those issues feed into the quality of care being delivered for black mothers and their babies. The inaccurate and dog-whistle assumptions around black women’s pain tolerance, for example, can lead to women being denied pain medication during childbirth, or misbelieved when raising concerns about pain felt that signals a severe medical condition.”
“Racial disparities are often identified as part of broader studies but, as far as I know, to date there has been no comprehensive medical study dedicated exclusively to racial disparities in maternity care and outcomes, despite the statistics consistently showing how bad things are becoming. The Lancet ’s recent study on maternal mortality and MBRRACE-UK’s reports do include racial breakdowns, but they are based on the data that they have, not the data that they need. A single, dedicated study is yet to be conducted. The lack of comprehensive research makes it incredibly difficult to see a full picture of what is happening, so I hope that the Minister will address that point and highlight what the Government are doing to get a clearer picture of the state of maternity care.”
“During the International Women’s Day debate, I highlighted the latest MBRRACE-UK data, which showed a statistically significant increase in the UK’s maternal death rate in the years 2020 to 2022, even when excluding deaths caused by covid-19. Put plainly, more women and babies of all races are dying in the UK now than in the past two decades. This is incredibly worrying, and it means that black women, who often face the worst care, are likely to experience even further deterioration. When I was researching the latest statistics and figures for this debate, it became increasingly apparent that the data on racial disparities in maternity care is limited and scattered. The data I have cited comes from a collection of reports by various medical bodies and advocacy organisations.”
“Some of these women’s experiences are deeply traumatic and scarring, and can lead to several mental health problems. Despite that, they are less likely to access mental health support, so they are left to try to recover mentally from the experience on their own. That disparity exists beyond pregnancy and childbirth, and even before conception. According to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, black women are 25 times less likely to access fertility treatment, and NHS-funded in vitro fertilisation cycles among black patients decreased from 60% in 2019 to 41% in 2021. Black and Asian patients aged 18 to 37 had the lowest IVF success rates compared with white patients in 2020-21, and non-white groups also struggled to access donor eggs, with 89% of egg donors being white, 4% Asian, 3% of mixed heritage and only 3% black.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention; he is absolutely right. I re-emphasise the point that black, Asian and minority ethnic women are more likely to suffer from common mental health disorders, yet are less likely to access treatment. According to MBRRACE-UK’s “Saving Lives, Improving Mothers’ Care” report from last October, deaths from mental health-related causes accounted for 34% of deaths occurring between six weeks and a year after the end of pregnancy. It is vital that all those who experience pregnancy and childbirth receive mental health support, even if they do not necessarily present as struggling with their mental health; but that is especially true of black, Asian and minority ethnic women, who are more likely to have a negative experience during pregnancy and childbirth.”
“Finally, do the Government acknowledge the presence of systemic racism within the NHS? If so, what steps are being taken to confront and eliminate it? It is good that in the past few years, the House has taken the time to acknowledge these issues and allow us to debate them, but even though the Government stated in their manifesto that a target will be set, we now need to see action. We cannot continue to see gaping inequalities in maternal outcomes.”
“I am also pleased to note that NHS England is developing a respectful and inclusive maternity care toolkit to support inclusive and culturally competent practice. Those are all really welcome developments, but much more is needed. I will close with four questions for the Minister. First, will the Government commit to a statutory inquiry into racial disparities in maternity care, including testimony from affected families and frontline providers? Secondly, will the Government fund dedicated research into the medical complications disproportionately affecting black women during pregnancy and childbirth? Thirdly, will the Government commission a review of maternity training across all medical professions, to better equip practitioners in recognising complications and symptoms in black women and babies?”
“Every local maternity system must now publish an equity and equality action plan that sets out tailored actions to reduce disparities, especially for ethnic minority women and those in deprived areas. I welcome the roll-out of version 3 of the Saving Babies’ Lives care bundle, which aims to reduce stillbirth, neonatal death, pre-term birth and brain injury. Maternal medicine networks are being established to ensure equitable access to specialist care for women at heightened risk. Those efforts are supported by the NHS equality, diversity and inclusion improvement plan, which was launched in 2023. That plan requires NHS organisations to tackle workforce discrimination, improve leadership accountability and foster an inclusive, harassment-free environment.”
“The Motherhood Group is a social enterprise supporting black mothers with peer-led services, training workshops and national campaigns. Its annual black maternal health conference brings together researchers, clinicians and service users to tackle disparities. It also launched the Blackmums app to connect mothers navigating similar challenges. Other charities such as Bliss, Tommy’s, Birthrights and the Royal College of Midwives also highlight racial disparities in their broader efforts to improve maternity care. Where the Government and the NHS have fallen short, they have taken the time to campaign and to step in. I will, however, acknowledge the positive steps that the new Government and the NHS have taken. In response to my written parliamentary questions last month, the Government outlined some ongoing measures.”
“My hon. Friend is absolutely right. These figures have been circulating for decades, but it was only after a successful parliamentary petition launched by Five X More that we first debated them in the House. We are now five or six years on and we are still in the same situation. Things have to change. I will continue to pay tribute to the amazing groups that have been pushing for decades to put the issue on the agenda. Mimosa Midwives is another remarkable group that offers culturally safe, continuous maternity care. It campaigns for a culturally appropriate care model in the NHS and for inclusive training in midwifery education to reflect diverse maternal experiences, because much of our medical training remains centred on white women.”
“I just want to check whether the hon. Lady understands that structural racism is about not the number of people within an organisation, but the way the organisation is set up and treats different people. Does she understand that having a high proportion of ethnic minority people does not necessarily mean that an organisation such as the NHS—which, I might add, in its senior levels is run by people mostly not from ethnic minorities—does not discriminate against people in a certain way?”
“Does the hon. Lady accept that, given that she is not of an ethnic minority and has not looked at the information given by a number of women from ethnic minority backgrounds who have experienced this, she is not really in a position to say that what they say they experienced does not exist?”
“I am just challenging her point. Just because for one or two reasons she may not have seen any institutional racism in the NHS, that does not mean it does not exist. Further, the figures for black maternal mortality are the same in the United States, which has a completely different healthcare system from ours, but they are not the same in countries in Africa or the Caribbean, where black women are the majority. Does she see why that can point only to institutional racism? It is a completely different healthcare system in United States. The only difference is that we are both living in societies where institutional racism is known to be a problem.”
“I did not say that the people in the NHS are racist; I said the NHS has a problem with institutional racism. I hope the hon. Member will accept that there are distinctions between those two things.”
“In my opening remarks, I mentioned the worrying findings from the recent MBRRACE-UK report, which revealed that the overall maternal death rate is increasing. That is outrageous. That should be alarming to all of us and should spur us into action. I say this each time we have this debate: improving the state of maternity care for black and ethnic minority women and babies will improve the overall quality of maternity care for all mothers and babies. I hope we can agree that that is certainly worth doing. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered Black Maternal Health Week 2025.”
“We must acknowledge them and, instead of burying our heads in the sand, tackle issues of racism and discrimination in our health service. Finally, I thank all the campaigners listening to the debate today again for their hard work and tireless campaigning. Many of the women in the campaign are involved because of their own experience in maternity care or that of a loved one. Many who have dedicated their time to campaigning on the issue do so because they do not want anybody else to go through what they did. It can be exhausting to re-live past traumas and continue to push the cause, but it is through their hard work that we are having the debate today and that we have a Government willing to address the issues.”
“Should there be a national inquiry into maternity services, we would hope that black maternal health would be considered as a clear element of the problem, with stand-alone recommendations on what should be done to tackle the disparities. That would be extremely important. I also thank the Minister for acknowledging the need for anti-racism training, that systemic racism exists, and that there are various things that we must do to tackle it. One of the worst things that can happen to women in this situation is being gaslit into thinking that their experiences did not happen. Women not being listened to purely because of what they look like, where they are from and their ethnic origin, is causing so many problems and even leading to deaths.”
“I know that the Government have committed to setting a target to end racial disparities in maternity care, and I was pleased to see it as a manifesto commitment, but at times, it can feel as though the issue is being kicked into the long grass, as the target has not yet been set. We are looking forward to that, and there are several campaigns watching the debate this afternoon that will have rejoiced when they heard that the Government have committed to setting a target. Like me, however, they continue to wait in eager anticipation to hear what it is. I hope the Minister will take that on board, and that we will not wait too much longer for the target to be announced.”
“Friend the Member for Sherwood Forest (Michelle Welsh), the chair of the APPG on maternity, gave a fantastic speech on the significant concerns about the quality and safety of maternity services in the Nottingham University Hospitals Trust. She made very important points on tackling the underlying issues of culture within the NHS. I was also pleased to hear the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Chichester (Jess Brown-Fuller), rightly pointing out that this disparity is a national scandal. We are at risk of normalising these issues, and it is so important that we continue to challenge them. Although I do not agree with the shadow Minister on much, she made a very good point about language services. I thank the Minister for her response and for detailing the steps that the Government are taking to tackle this.”
“I thank all Members present in this afternoon’s debate for their thoughtful and balanced contributions. It is not very often in the House that we are generally in agreement, so I am heartened to be joined by Members from different political backgrounds calling for us to improve the state of maternity care. I was grateful for the intervention from my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester Rusholme (Afzal Khan), who talked about the lack of spaces where black women feel supported and the importance of increasing those for all women in maternity care. My hon. Friend the Member for Croydon East (Natasha Irons) pointed out the need for a national target and framework to challenge these issues. My hon.”
“Will the Prime Minister commit to reviewing the rules and join me in calling on you, Mr Speaker, to help us all play our part by facilitating a biannual blood drive in Parliament?”
“Q8. I am sure the Prime Minister will join me in celebrating the opening of the new Brixton blood donation centre in my constituency, which in three months has seen over 3,700 people donate, more than 1,000 of them first-timers and 10% of them black. However, given that sickle cell anaemia is the fastest growing genetic condition in the UK, that is not enough. Demand for the Ro blood subtype—more common in people of African descent—is rising by 10% to 15% annually, and it is crucial for treating sickle cell. Rules around travellers as well as inaccurate iron tests mean that we are seeing willing black donors turned away for four to 12 months. Of course blood donation must be safe, but failure to review the guidelines is costing lives.”
“For me, the most important aspect of our country is not our flags or even our institutions, but our people, and our people—the elected representatives of thousands of British people—have been treated with contempt. My understanding was that we are Britain and you do not do this to us. There is, at least, consensus on this side of the House that this is not how we should expect to be treated by our allies. While I welcome the Minister’s statement, I still cannot understand where our red lines were when thousands were slaughtered, when aid was prevented from entering Gaza, or when international law or the ceasefire was broken. Can he explain where those red lines are, and how, when Britain and Parliament have been insulted, we can continue to sell arms to Israel?”
“My constituents deserve a better service, and the continued private ownership of Thames Water will not bring that. Public ownership will not solve every single issue with Thames Water, but it will certainly solve more than allowing an American company to take it over and profit off the backs of my constituents.”
“I do believe that the Government should be supporting Thames Water—supporting it back into public ownership. That is the only support that they should give it. Rather than a US private equity firm being allowed to take it over, it should be taken over by the Government and made accountable to its service users, the British public. Those who are against nationalisation on an ideological basis will say that competition is needed to ensure innovation and the best service, but there is no competition for Thames Water. Which other water company can my constituents switch to when the service is poor? It makes no sense to me that a new private company should be allowed to take over and reap the profits with little incentive to provide a better service.”
“The service will remain shoddy, but the price that customers are made to pay will rise. Thames Water is rinsing my constituents, pouring sewage into our waterways and siphoning off money to shareholders, and hiking up bills to pay for it. It is fair to say that Thames Water’s management are comparable with what the company is dumping in the Thames—crap. They are just crap. They are running the company’s finances into the ground and relying on the Government to bail them out, all the while leaving my constituents in the vulnerable position of having no running water at times. If they are relying on the Government to bail them out, we taxpayers are literally paying them twice. Clearly, they cannot be trusted to operate such a vital service legitimately, and they certainly should not be allowed to pocket thousands of pounds in the process.”
“Member for Sutton and Cheam that Ofwat is also unfit for purpose. Others may have a better understanding of how such things work, but I do not understand how a company that is in debt and failing, and that has damaged infrastructure, has the money to pay dividends to its shareholders. While my constituents’ taps run dry, the fat cats of Thames Water are literally turning theirs on—but not to drink the water of course, because they know better. The cherry on the sewage-filled cake? On Tuesday, my constituents and millions of Thames Water customers woke up to what would have been the world’s worst April fool’s day joke—the grim reality of a 31% bill increase. One constituent wrote to me because they are experiencing a 45.8% increase in their monthly bill, from £36.55 to £53.30 a month.”
“In October 2023, Thames Water made interim dividend payments totalling £37.5 million to its holding company, Thames Water Utilities Holdings Ltd, while the pipes were literally rotting under our feet. In March 2024, the company made further dividend payments amounting to £158.3 million, from which shareholders received non-cash benefits, all while the quality of water has continued to decline every single year. Thames Water chairman Sir Adrian Montague was accused of a conflict of interest over the £37 million in dividend payments that were made to shareholders in February 2025. Under his tenure, Thames Water paid £195.8 million in dividends, breaching Ofwat rules. Ofwat fined it just £18 million, but Thames Water paid zero pounds of that £18 million fine. I agree with the hon.”
“In 2023, a burst water pipe on Brixton Hill left residents without water for three days. Last July, on one of the hottest days of the year, residents of Clarence Avenue had their water shut off without any prior notice. As recently as December, faulty valve pumps in Brixton left homes without water for more than four days. Those are just the most recent incidents—as I said, there have been a number of them since I was elected. The residents of Clapham and Brixton Hill are not the only ones who will have experienced those disruptions in service, so Members can imagine my constituents’ outrage when, in the wake of poor service and increased bills, they see Thames Water’s shareholders and directors receive millions of pounds in dividends.”
“It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms Lewell. I thank the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Luke Taylor) for securing the debate and for not supporting Thames Water; I am very pleased to hear that. I do not think anyone has been deluded into thinking that Thames Water is doing a good job—certainly not me or my constituents. Since I was elected to this House, hardly a year has passed without another major water infrastructure issue that leaves hundreds of my constituents without water for days on end. That is not to mention the years that I have lived in my constituency and been a victim of Thames Water’s extremely shoddy service. Apart from three years in Yorkshire, I have had to endure Thames Water for the entirety of my life, and it has shown very little concern for the impact that it has.”
“How much of the fine that the hon. Gentleman mentioned has Thames Water actually paid? How was it allowed to pay out all these dividends in previous years, given the measures that he is setting out? I genuinely cannot understand how that was allowed to continue for so long.”
“I have to ask the hon. Member why he is so against the idea of nationalising water. I am sure he agrees that the whole idea of privatisation is that there is some sort of competition, but there cannot be competition with water, and therefore we cannot guarantee a good service. We are seeing that at the moment, and we saw it under the Conservative Government for a number of years. Does he understand why privatisation cannot really work in this instance?”
“I thank the Minister for her attention to this situation, but I have to ask on behalf of my constituents, how much more does Thames Water have to fail before we decide that it is no longer fit to operate? The level of failure is so high that, although I appreciate what the Minister says about following the letter of the law, people simply will not understand.”
“I have met many leaseholders fighting for fair treatment from housing association freeholders such as Metropolitan Thames Valley Housing, Hyde, L&Q, Notting Hill Genesis, Optivo and Peabody, to name a few. They are struggling to secure general repairs, sort issues with damp and mould and get transparency about rising service charges that are running into the thousands of pounds. Such behaviour from a landlord or council would be considered unacceptable, yet housing associations continue to act with impunity, and past leasehold reform legislation has done little to address the issues. Can the Leader of the House assure leaseholders in my constituency that the Government will take legislative steps to ensure that they are able to hold their housing association freeholders to account?”
“I congratulate my hon. Friend and her Committee on this crucial report. As my constituency neighbour, she knows how much this is an issue within our borough, and I am sure she would agree that the end to no-fault evictions in the Renters’ Reform Bill will be a positive step towards ending the number of families who are evicted with no cause and forced into emergency and temporary accommodation. Our hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) just spoke about extortionate and unregulated rent increases in the private sector forcing families into temporary accommodation. Does the Chair agree that the Government should be looking at regulating private rents—essentially rent controls—so that they are affordable for the average family?”
“Education is the best tool against ignorance, but it has to be properly funded and teachers have to be properly trained to deliver it. I sincerely hope to hear from the Minister about the concrete steps that the Government will take to invest in RSE. Making it compulsory is important, but proper funding and training mean, ultimately, that it will be done well. It being done badly is almost as bad as not teaching it at all.”
“We need comprehensive relationship and sex education that is age-appropriate and delivered by well-trained teachers, who could be crucial in combating toxic incel ideology, or who, at the very least, would provide students with correct information that counters the stuff they read on the internet or watch on YouTube. Effective classes can provide a safe, non-judgmental space for children to ask questions. If they do not have that, we risk either leaving their questions unanswered or leaving them to the mercy of some Andrew Tate-esque figures who will fill their heads with poison. Both options are cause for concern, but the latter is nearly unthinkable. Like all forms of discrimination, misogyny is ignorance.”
“The core of relationship and sex education, beyond the basics of biology, is to teach children about healthy relationships. It is about teaching young girls and boys how to properly respect and interact with someone they are in a relationship with, whether that is romantic, sexual, platonic or familial. Their understanding of these relationships can be informed by good-quality education, and it goes without saying that the opposite is also true. Poor-quality RSE can drastically impact a child’s understanding of relationships and cause untold damage.”
“As we have heard, it touches on a number of issues relating to incel culture, the manosphere and the increasingly concerning attitude towards women and girls that is infecting our young boys. We often talk about incel culture and toxic attitudes towards women, and indeed men, but we fail to properly come up with solutions on how to tackle them. We land on things such as limiting social media access for young people, placing more onus on social media sites to monitor online chatter and take down harmful posts and videos, or reducing the airtime given to toxic individuals who perpetuate this kind of nonsense. Those are all really useful options that we have to consider and take action on, but they are far from the solution. We really ought to look at the role that education can play in combating misinformed views.”
“That has only helped to fuel certain issues, which has been awful for promoting the healthy and proper teaching of relationship and sex education. The latest Sex Education Forum report found that only 50% of the 16 to 17-year-olds surveyed rated their RSE classes as “good” or “very good”. That is an improvement on the previous year’s findings, but it still demonstrates that the relationship and sex education of our young people is simply not good enough. Hopefully, everybody has by now heard about the truly gripping Netflix drama, “Adolescence”. For any Members who have not yet seen it, I cannot recommend it strongly enough. It is a crucial watch for anyone who works with, or indeed, legislates for children, as we do.”
“The reality is that in the UK, we are failing to provide our children with the quality relationship and sex education that they need. That is leading to a number of issues and gaps in their understanding of healthy relationships. Our children’s RSE classes are grossly inadequate and severely outdated, and in some cases, are not taught at all. Despite RSE being compulsory for all primary school pupils, 50% of students reported receiving no RSE classes during the covid lockdown. We are talking, of course, about age-appropriate sex education, because the catch-all term and sensationalist headlines have led some parents to believe that their children are being taught things at certain ages when they are obviously not.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy, and I thank the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) for securing this crucial debate. I am sure we can all agree that every aspect of a child’s education is important and plays a crucial role in shaping them into well-rounded members of society, but there is a strong argument that no lesson is more valuable in shaping our young people than relationship and sex education. From teaching the basics of puberty, reproduction and how to engage in an adult relationship, to understanding issues around consent, abuse and sexual and gender identity, good-quality relationship and sex education gives children a crucial basis for relationships. It will influence their interactions with others for the rest of their lives.”