Kirith Entwistle
MP for Bolton North East · Labour · United Kingdom
“I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this debate to the House and for mentioning the so-called experts. We know that accusations of so-called parental alienation are too often used against mothers who are trying to protect their children, but because so few family law cases are publicly available, we do not know the true extent of the prob…”
“That is why Government support to help parents secure high-quality early years provision is so important. In Bolton North East, we are making progress on early years support. At the Valley community school, Government investment is helping refurbish old spaces, create a new play area and expand nursery provision.”
“But once the provider’s charges for meals and consumables were added in, and because of the way the hours are structured, their bill barely changed and that extra day remained out of reach. Government support is meant to help families, not be lost in extra charges and inflexible arrangements. This is not about attacking providers.”
“Nor should we have to choose between what we can afford and what our child deserves. Children cannot build essential skills in a system that does not fit around the realities of family life. Too often, it is still mums who are expected to make it fit.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) for securing this debate. I feel it is my duty as someone sadly nearing the end of parenting a child in nursery to talk specifically about early years.”
“I say that not just as the MP for Bolton North East, but as a single mum with a young son growing up in Bolton. I have often wondered whose idea it was to have school hours set from 8 am to 3 pm, working hours set from 9 am to 5 pm, and vital services operating within those hours. How on earth are parents supposed to make that work?”
The complete record
Every one of 219 lines we hold for Kirith Entwistle, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 5.
“I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this debate to the House and for mentioning the so-called experts. We know that accusations of so-called parental alienation are too often used against mothers who are trying to protect their children, but because so few family law cases are publicly available, we do not know the true extent of the problem. The campaigns led by Right to Equality, Women’s Aid and Hague Mothers are important, but does my hon. Friend agree that when a mother says, “My child is not safe,” the court should hear her and believe her rather than using the guise of parental alienation to dismiss her?”
“No one should have to give up their dream of having a family because society is not set up to support them or because it punishes them for doing so, and no parent should have to make the tough choice to say no to having more children simply because they cannot afford to. Finally, single parents should not fear having to shoulder the responsibility alone. Every parent deserves to be supported by a society that benefits from all of us having children. [Interruption.]”
“My asks of the Minister are simple: strengthen enforcement so funded hours are genuinely free, transparent and usable; review whether funding rates reflect the real costs of high-quality provision; and put the essential skills that children need and the flexibility that families need at the heart of early years reform. Every child deserves the best start, and that has to be something families feel in the support they receive, in the childcare they can rely on and in the confidence their children carry through the school gate. Having children should not be an unmanageable financial burden. It should not be a choice with a cost attached to it.”
“Too often, flexibility is just another word for women being expected to bend their lives further and further, being made to feel guilty every time they ask for an adjustment, or being told that they are putting their job at risk. It also completely disregards single parents. Parents who need flexible working are too often treated as a problem to be managed, rather than as people who hold families, workplaces and communities together—and then we wonder why birth rates are falling. We cannot keep making motherhood expensive, uncertain and career-damaging and then act surprised when more and more women feel the choice has already been made for them.”
“Nor should we have to choose between what we can afford and what our child deserves. Children cannot build essential skills in a system that does not fit around the realities of family life. Too often, it is still mums who are expected to make it fit. Of course parents make sacrifices every day to help their children develop those essential skills, but our early years model still assumes that someone is at home, usually mum, to bridge the gap between nursery hours and working hours—someone who can do the 3 pm pick-up, cover sick days and leave work the moment nursery calls. In reality, that often means reducing her hours, turning down that promotion, losing income and then being told she is lucky to have flexibility, if she even gets it in the first place.”
“But once the provider’s charges for meals and consumables were added in, and because of the way the hours are structured, their bill barely changed and that extra day remained out of reach. Government support is meant to help families, not be lost in extra charges and inflexible arrangements. This is not about attacking providers. Many early years providers and staff in Bolton do extraordinary work every day, often under real pressure, but at the most crucial point in a child’s development, it is wrong that profit can be made from childcare while families are left fighting for consistent standards, transparency and fairness. As parents, we should not have to rely on guidance that, even when improved on paper, is still inconsistently applied and too weakly enforced.”
“I say that not just as the MP for Bolton North East, but as a single mum with a young son growing up in Bolton. I have often wondered whose idea it was to have school hours set from 8 am to 3 pm, working hours set from 9 am to 5 pm, and vital services operating within those hours. How on earth are parents supposed to make that work? One parent in my constituency told me that they had hoped the Government’s expansion of funded childcare from 15 to 30 hours would bring some relief—just that little bit of breathing space, enough to add one more nursery day so that grandparents did not have to keep filling the gap, or flexible working requests did not have to keep being made.”
“That is why Government support to help parents secure high-quality early years provision is so important. In Bolton North East, we are making progress on early years support. At the Valley community school, Government investment is helping refurbish old spaces, create a new play area and expand nursery provision. Our family hubs—Bright Meadows, Oxford Grove, Tonge and Oldhams—give families somewhere to get support without feeling judged. That progress matters, but it is not enough on its own. Across Bolton, more than a third of children are starting school without the essential skills that they need, making it harder to learn, communicate and build relationships from day one. For parents wanting to do their best for their children, the core question is whether early years support is accessible, affordable and workable in real life.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) for securing this debate. I feel it is my duty as someone sadly nearing the end of parenting a child in nursery to talk specifically about early years. When we talk about children developing essential skills, we often start too late. Learning does not begin when a child starts reception; it begins the very moment they are born, if not sooner. The skills they develop during the first months and years provide the foundation that children need to thrive in school. Nurseries, pre-schools and childcare providers play a crucial role in helping children build those skills, day by day, through care, routine support and encouragement.”
“T3. Short waiting lists for cataract surgery are a success story, thanks in part to the partnership between the NHS and providers such as SpaMedica, headquartered in my constituency. However, ICB indicative activity plans could see waiting lists increase from weeks to over four months. How will cataract patients be protected while we maintain those all-important short waiting lists?”
“For victims in Bolton who have waited far too long to be properly informed, supported and heard, this Bill will make a real difference, and I am proud to support it.”
“I understand the intention behind Lords amendments 1 and 3, on court transcripts, which try to address the same basic problem: victims not getting clear enough information about decisions that affect them. Victims deserve clarity, and the process must be more transparent, but the Government have been consistent in saying that these amendments go further than is currently operationally feasible. If we create duties that the courts do not have the capacity to fill safely, victims will be let down once again. If we promise a process that cannot be delivered in practice, we are not building trust; we are undermining it. This Bill marks an important step forward in strengthening the rights of victims, ensuring that offenders are held to account and rebuilding confidence in our justice system.”
“It is a pleasure to speak in today’s debate. I first spoke on this Bill on Second Reading, when I said that victims in Bolton had waited far too long for a system that truly works for them. This Bill delivers critical reforms to protect victims and rebuild confidence in our justice system, from powers to tackle non-attendance at hearings to measures strengthening the rights of victims. It will help victims to get the justice they deserve, and I am pleased that this Labour Government are getting on with the changes that victims and campaigners have needed for far too long. I am particularly pleased to support the measures in this Bill that strengthen victims’ rights to receive information. The dedicated victim helpline and the updated victim contact scheme will help end uncertainty and stop victims having to keep chasing for basic updates.”
“I am currently supporting a constituent who, after leaving her abuser, was locked out of her home, left with thousands of pounds of arrears that had been run up in her name, and denied access to her own bank account. Does the Minister agree that post-separation abuse is too often overlooked and still not recognised widely enough? What steps is she taking to better protect victims?”
“Although I am proud of the steps that our Government have taken to advance online safety, we are merely playing catch-up. What more are the Government doing to ensure that we keep pace with the reality facing women and girls and how will they address emerging technologies such as AI smart glasses, which are operating without scrutiny?”
“It is a moment of courage, relief and when they hope the worst is finally behind them. What too many discover is that the abuse does not end when they leave; it simply changes form. Again and again, I hear from survivors who tell me the same thing: the child maintenance service has just become another arena in which the abuse can continue.”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered the effectiveness of the Child Maintenance Service. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I declare an interest, as I am currently involved in a tribunal with the Department for Work and Pensions concerning my own child maintenance service case, which I will not refer to today. I am bringing this motion before the House to highlight the urgent need for reform to the child maintenance service, particularly how it deals with post-separation abuse. What should be a system designed to support children is, in reality, too often used by perpetrators as a means of continuing both psychological and economic control and abuse. For many victim-survivors of domestic abuse, leaving a relationship is the hardest step they will ever take, particularly when children are involved.”
“That is exactly why this debate matters. I will come on to some of the points my hon. Friend raised. When a public service not only allows, but actively facilitates, the continuation of abuse and fails to recognise the realities of coercive control, it is not just flawed; it is unjust. The national evidence is deeply concerning. Research by Gingerbread, a charity supporting single-parent families, found that 77% of primary carers using the CMS reported experiencing domestic abuse from the other parent.”
“For a moment, there is hope that the system might understand the gravity of that disclosure, but what follows is often little more than signposting to a list of organisations before the process simply continues as though the question had never been asked. Ultimately, the disclosure changes nothing. There is no meaningful change in how the case is handled, no structural safeguards and no recognition that the dynamics of abuse may shape the entire case. Crucially, it does nothing to change the tone of communications with the CMS. For someone who has taken enormous personal risk to leave an abusive partner, that can feel like jumping out of a plane only to find that there is no parachute, no safe landing and no one to catch them when they fall.”
“Absolutely. Even more troubling is that 45% of the parents in that research said that the CMS’s involvement had actually led to an increase in abusive behaviour. Those figures should stop us in our tracks. For survivors, the very experience of using the CMS can be deeply distressing. From the cold tone of emails and letters to the aggressive and harsh text messages, right through to the opaque way payments are calculated, the process can be deeply triggering for those who have experienced abuse. At the very beginning, survivors are asked whether they have experienced abuse and what form that abuse took.”
“The hon. Member is absolutely right. I will come on to that issue shortly. Surely we must ask whether this is really the standard we are willing to accept. Another fundamental weakness lies in how the CMS deals with shared care, in that it absolutely fails to do so. In theory, maintenance calculations are meant to reflect the number of nights a child spends with each parent; in reality, the system largely relies on what parents report themselves. Rather than establishing the reality of shared care, the number of nights is effectively averaged out based on those reports, with no evidence required. When parents try to push back and provide evidence, that is often disregarded unless a court order is in place.”
“My hon. Friend raises a particularly important point. I will come on to the collect and pay service and how that is also broken. The result of how the CMS deals with shared care is a system that accepts unverified claims, but refuses genuine evidence. It is confusing, adversarial and often deeply unfair. The structure of the CMS also creates the wrong incentives. When maintenance calculations change depending on the number of nights a child spends with each parent, disputes over care arrangements quickly become disputes over money. Fortalice, a leading domestic abuse charity in my town of Bolton, is all too aware of that problem. It tells me of cases where a parent seeks increased overnight contact—not because that is in the child’s best interests, but to reduce their CMS payments or claim additional financial support.”
“Emily has repeatedly asked for her case to be moved to collect and pay, so that payments can be handled through the CMS without that direct interaction, yet delays, missed call-backs and poor communication have left her stuck in a process that exposes her to distress and financial uncertainty. Other frontline charities in Bolton, such as Endeavour, tell me that they see that pattern all too regularly. Survivors describe payments being withheld, not because the other parent cannot afford to pay but because that unpredictability becomes a form of control. Many report that payments stop just before birthdays, Christmas or school holidays, only to restart later. That pattern is not random; it is about maintaining power. Survivors tell us that they feel trapped by the CMS, and we absolutely must listen.”
“I completely agree. These issues are not theoretical; I see them repeatedly in cases raised by my own constituents in Bolton. One constituent, who I will call Emily, left an abusive relationship and is still dealing with the consequences through the CMS. She describes intimidation and harassment from the father of her children, alongside unreliable maintenance payments. Money arrives late, arrives short or does not arrive at all. Her case remains on direct pay, meaning that the system still relies on co-operation between parents, even when there is a history of abuse. For many survivors, that is not a neutral arrangement: it can mean ongoing contact with the person they are trying to escape and persistent fear about what will happen if they challenge missing payments.”
“That is such a powerful point, and I am really sorry on behalf of my hon. Friend’s constituent. Sadly, that is not an isolated case. Some say that they are asked to pay far more than they can afford, while others say that the support they receive does not come close to covering the cost of raising their children. When they try to seek clarification, they hit another problem with the CMS: inconsistency. Different advisers give different answers, and staff are working from guidance rather than clear, consistent rules. As a result, parents can end up receiving conflicting advice from the very organisation that is meant to support them and their children through a difficult time.”
“Absolutely. The system is fundamentally broken. Children must be at the heart of any decision made about them. It is important to recognise that many parents, particularly single mothers, who have experienced abuse do not use the CMS at all. They avoid it because engaging with the system may mean renewed contact with the very person they are trying to escape. They do not see the CMS as protection, but merely as another channel through which a perpetrator can exert control.”
“First, we need a genuinely child-centred approach to maintenance so that decisions about contact and payments are driven by children’s wellbeing, rather than financial incentives. Secondly, disclosures of domestic abuse must trigger meaningful safeguards, not mere signposting or lip service. There must also be clearer evidential standards for shared care, particularly where no court order is in place. Finally, survivors should have better access to collect and pay alongside a named caseworker so they are not forced into ongoing contact with perpetrators or required to repeat traumatic experiences.”
“How can we possibly continue with a service that allows that to happen—a service that effectively tells perpetrators that more overnight contact may mean lower maintenance payments; a service where the amount paid can be disputed, delayed or manipulated because the rules are unclear; a service where weak enforcement allows some parents to evade their responsibilities altogether; and a service that some survivors avoid entirely because it does not feel safe? Campaigning organisations, such as Gingerbread, have already set out practical proposals for change, and I would be grateful if the Minister could address three areas where the system must work better for survivors and their children.”
“Absolutely. My hon. Friend raises yet another issue with the CMS and highlights just how badly the system is set up. Mothers struggle on alone, absorbing financial pressure themselves rather than risking opening the door to further abuse. That should deeply concern this House. We must remember what is at stake. Child maintenance exists for one reason: to support the quality of life and wellbeing of children. Yet the experiences that we have all described suggest that children are being drawn into adult conflict, rather than being protected and shielded from it. In the worst cases, the CMS allows children to be weaponised by perpetrators; I can make no stronger point than that.”
“Absolutely; it is just another vehicle being used by perpetrators to continue that post-separation abuse. At its heart, this debate is about the lives of children growing up in separated families across the country. The child maintenance service was created with the intention of supporting those children, but when the system allows post-separation abuse to continue, when it leaves survivors feeling unheard and unsafe, and when children are drawn into that harm, it is clear that reform is urgently needed. The question we must ask ourselves is simple: can we honestly continue with a system that allows children to be weaponised by perpetrators of abuse? I do not believe that we can.”
“Too many women have told me that the family courts felt like an extension of the abuse that they were trying to escape. Does my hon. Friend agree that ending the presumption of parental involvement is a crucial step towards ensuring that children’s safety, not the automatic assumption of contact, is the starting point in every case?”
“I recently met judges in Bolton who spoke about issues with prisoner transportation that are also causing serious delays. Does my hon. Friend agree that we should also look at that as a means of speeding things up and improving efficiency?”
“I commend my hon. Friend on her exemplary campaigning on behalf of her constituent Claire Throssell. Does she agree that it is not right that rape victims are waiting 400 days to be heard?”
“I am proud that this Labour Government will lift more than 4,500 children in my constituency out of poverty by scrapping the two-child limit, but what further measures are the Government implementing to tackle child poverty and support families in my constituency?”
“At my online advice surgery yesterday, I met constituent Jenny Wilson, who has fought tirelessly for her son Maxwell to receive support from their local authority—he is without a formal diagnosis. Jenny and other parents in my constituency would like to know what more the Government are doing to help children who do not have a formal diagnosis and are still being denied EHCPs or any additional support.”
“In winter, nearly three quarters of women change their outdoor exercise routines for safety, and over four in five say they feel unsafe in parks at night. I know that most of us avoid parks altogether.”
“Here is the bitter irony: a lot of us can only exercise when it is dark, because we are primary caregivers. We do the school runs, and we care for our elderly or disabled relatives, or our children with additional needs. Society relies and depends on that care, and then acts surprised when women’s lives are more restricted and when we are forced to pay for safety. For many women, a gym membership is the price of feeling secure enough to exercise at all. Women-only spaces in gyms are growing, and that is progress, but where is the acknowledgment that many women are paying simply to do what others can do for free—exercise without fear? Let us be clear: this is not a confidence gap; it is a safety gap that is rooted in our environment and systems.”
“My dad would say, “Don’t take your phone out when you are walking home. Don’t listen to music on a walk home. Stay alert. Cross the road if a man’s behind you. Walk with your keys between your fingers.” All of that does not just disappear when we grow up. Only last week, when I was going for a run in Bolton, I shared my location with my family over WhatsApp, just in case. “Just in case”—those words tell us everything. I wear a running vest with a phone pocket. I clip my SOS fob to my clothes. I plan my route as if I was carrying out a risk assessment, and that is the point. Men do not make contingency plans to exercise, but we absolutely have to. When it comes to exercise, women are constrained by the hours that we can safely be outdoors. Even in daylight, safer does not mean safe, and after dark many women feel pushed indoors.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Jess Asato) for securing this important and timely debate. Put simply, women are not safe running, walking, cycling or even just existing. We are not safe in our own homes; we are not safe in pubs, bars, restaurants, at school or at work; and crucially, for the purposes of this debate, we are not even safe at the gym. Girls are at risk, too. How many of us here today have stories that start with our wearing school uniform? When I was at school, men in cars slowed down beside me, men in white vans asked me where I was going, and grown men followed me and asked to wear my glasses; I am not wearing them today. As the daughter of a prison officer, I was educated early, not in confidence but in caution.”
“That starts by building routes that we can actually use—the well-lit, connected routes that were mentioned earlier—and, as my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft said, treating harassment as public safety, making it easier to report and making it clear that it will be taken seriously. Finally, we must put women’s safety into transport planning from day one, and ensure that progress is measured so that we can check whether the gender gap in cycling and walking is closing.”
“Black, Asian and minority ethnic women are nearly 20% less likely than white women to exercise outdoors regularly, and half as likely to cycle to work. If we bear in mind both the ethnicity and gender pay gaps, we are also less likely to be able to afford a gym membership. In Bolton, I am proud of the grassroots work that is making a difference, including Horwich Ride Social’s women-only rides, Krimmz girls youth club’s glow rides and the United We Run campaign, which gives thousands of Bolton women access to the Her Spirit fitness app. These initiatives, while brilliant, are also a warning sign. Women should not need safety in numbers. It is time that we address women’s safety properly, as we should have done for decades.”
“My hon. Friend makes the important point, which I will come on to, that well-lit spaces would make a world of difference for so many women and girls. The safety gap that I mentioned earlier is also written into our transport patterns. In Greater Manchester, women make less than a third of all cycling trips. When women are asked why that is, they talk about traffic danger, harassment and intimidation. One Bolton resident told me that routes can feel pleasant by day but unusable after dark, and that one incident can be enough to stop women from cycling altogether. Women’s participation in outdoor exercise is already lower than men’s, but the safety gap widens again for women from ethnic minority backgrounds, who face higher levels of harassment on the streets.”
“Now we need our NHS to match that with consistency; every week we delay, more families will be left asking the most painful question of all. They reached out for help, so why were they still not safe?”
“The Government have set out an ambition that by 2029 there will be dedicated referral services for women and girls affected by abuse in every area of England. That is exactly the direction we should be travelling in. However, those routes must cover the whole NHS. Finally, the NHS should establish a universal codeword scheme, so that a victim can ask for support just as easily as we can at pharmacies, a bar, a pub or even a restaurant. The NHS is our frontline and it absolutely needs to be well-equipped to spot, safeguard against and deal with domestic abuse, as it should have been doing for decades. Domestic abuse thrives in silence and isolation. The NHS can be the opposite of that: a place where someone is seen, believed and connected to safety. Bolton has shown what is possible when services work together—when we connect the dots.”
“If a patient can say, “I am not safe,” and the NHS cannot act, the NHS is not yet safe enough. So how do we make it consistently safe? I have three practical asks. First, we need proper and consistent domestic abuse training—not a one-off e-learning module but trauma-informed training, refreshed over time for the whole team, including reception staff, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud said, who are often the ones who see the warning signs first. The Government have said that they will launch a mandatory safeguarding and learning programme that covers domestic abuse. That is welcome, but it must be embedded in day-to-day NHS practices. Secondly, there must be sustained funding for evidence-based pathways, such as IRIS and the specialist services that it relies on, because referral routes work only if support exists and exists safely.”
“It helps clinicians ask safe questions, spot warning signs and act so that when someone says, or their face or demeanour tells us, that they are not safe, the response is not panic or paperwork but support. We need that consistently, because Bolton has seen what happens when the system does not join the dots. One case that has stayed with local services is the domestic homicide review of Margaret—not her real name: an 80-year-old woman killed by her husband in 2019. While the husband was in hospital, Margaret disclosed fear and abuse and said that she did not feel safe. Those concerns were discussed in a meeting between hospital staff and social workers, yet once her husband’s physical health stabilised, he was discharged home. Days later, Margaret was dead.”
“Our healthcare system is the frontline of support for victims of domestic abuse. Tragically, too many survivors are forced to seek help again and again before the system even responds. In fact, 85% seek professional support about five times before they finally receive help. In Bolton, we see both the challenge and one of the solutions. We operate a system called Identification and Referral to Improve Safety, a specialist training programme that links GP practices directly with domestic abuse support services. IRIS is delivered by Fortalice, a local domestic abuse charity—I am incredibly grateful to Gill and her team for their hard work. Since it began in 2014, nearly 3,000 victims have accessed support, and 274 healthcare professionals were trained in the last year alone. That training matters, because it changes what happens in the room.”
“That is a flashing warning light for the health service. If suicide is preventable, domestic abuse-related suicide must be treated as preventable too. A duty of care is real only if staff are trained and equipped to carry it out. If someone reaches out in the NHS and gets silence or disbelief back, or if a note is taken but there is no action, that can be the moment that they stop asking for help. In domestic abuse, missed moments can be fatal. For the majority of victims and survivors, health professionals are the first—sometimes the only—person they disclose to. People often assume that a victim’s first call is to the police, but the first brave step for many survivors who disclose is often telling a GP, a midwife, a nurse, a health visitor or even their pharmacist.”
“The moment someone sits in a GP waiting room trying to keep their voice steady, the moment that someone turns up at A&E with an injury that they cannot easily explain, the moment that someone finds out they are pregnant at a maternity appointment and are terrified of going home, or wants to ask for help but cannot because their perpetrator is sat there with them—those are moments of contact with the NHS and crucial opportunities to save a life. The NHS absolutely has a duty of care to its patients: it must not just treat injuries but respond when someone is at risk. In domestic abuse, risk is not theoretical. The most recent national figures show that there are 108 domestic homicides a year. For the first time, suspected suicides linked to domestic abuse have overtaken intimate partner homicides.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir John. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) for securing this important debate, which has crucially focused on the important fact that prevention has to work across the NHS. When domestic abuse escalates towards serious harm or death, what can the NHS do to stop it? For too long, we have talked about domestic abuse as if it happens outside public services—as if it starts and ends behind closed doors—but the truth is that the NHS is already in the story; it just has to connect the dots.”