Samantha Niblett
MP for South Derbyshire · Labour · United Kingdom
“Regular surgeries and monthly coffee mornings are among the most valuable parts of my role. They allow me to listen, understand what matters to people and ensure that the work we do, both in the constituency and in this place, reflects their experiences.”
“We did not stop the Stanton incinerator, too many SEND families are still battling a system that lets them down and many of my constituents continue to face challenges with fleecehold, inappropriate development and poor roads.”
“It is a privilege to contribute to this debate in memory of Sir David Amess. Sir David embodied what it means to be a great constituency MP. He understood that our greatest responsibility is not just what happens in this Chamber, but what happens in our communities, our surgeries and our conversations with the people who put their trust i…”
“I want to put on record my thanks to the Prime Minister, not only for turning the Labour party around and getting us elected, but for helping me to be elected as the Member for South Derbyshire so that I can represent constituents of mine such as Abbey Wright, whom I met this week to talk about her beloved dad.”
“Then there is Alfred, who is just 10, and his mum Emma, who we helped access funding for specialist therapies. There is Kaeson and his family, whose mobility support was restored, and families who have secured vital medical appointments, specialist equipment or simply someone to help them navigate an overwhelming system.”
“Between us, we have experience in the NHS, business, education, the arts and the charitable sector, but we all share one thing: a determination to help people.”
The complete record
Every one of 271 lines we hold for Samantha Niblett, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 6.
“I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend that it is a crucial first step. I cannot understand how anybody in all good conscience can run a puppy farm, but I understand how some people have the wool pulled over their eyes to buy from one. If we take away puppy farms as an option, those people will not be tricked. The scale of this issue is vast. There are an estimated 35 million pets living in the UK, with the pet care market worth £8.2 billion and forecast to grow by 7% annually. At the same time, there are around 150 million farmed animals in England at any one time, comprising 22 million cattle, sheep and pigs and 133 million poultry. The livestock sector contributes £20.1 billion to the UK economy, thanks to the hard work of our farmers.”
“While I welcome the Government’s ambition to end the killing of day-old chicks, it is essential that we work closely with the farming industry to ensure that the costs are not unfairly passed on to farmers and that any transition happens on a realistic timeline.”
“Public support for this approach is overwhelming: a 2021 National Farmers Union survey found that 86% of respondents believe that animal welfare standards for imports should match those in the UK, while a Which? survey found that 87% of people agree that imported food should meet our animal welfare standards. Each year, approximately 40 million to 45 million male chicks from conventional laying-hen breeds are culled within 12 to 36 hours of hatching. It is encouraging that the UK egg industry is exploring technology to sex eggs before chicks are born, with the aim of eliminating the need for this practice.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention. As MPs, we are pulled in every direction by many people, and it is hard to be in all places at all times, but the issues that cut through the most are the ones that are campaigned on the hardest and the heaviest. I am super grateful to the campaign groups that have helped to shape the animal welfare strategy. I am reassured that the Labour Government recognise animal welfare as a global issue and have committed to continuing to work with organisations such as the World Organisation for Animal Health and the World Trade Organisation to champion high standards internationally and promote best practice.”
“However, “a significant proportion” does not mean all animals, and I understand and share the concerns of those who are worried about the percentage that are not stunned before slaughter. On the difficult subject of end of life for animals, I was grateful to the British Association for Shooting and Conservation for inviting me to a game dinner last November. I feel far more comfortable eating meat from animals that have lived a full life in open spaces in our beautiful Derbyshire countryside, and whose deaths were carried out swiftly by trained conservationists who play a key role in conservation, pest control and habitat management. I am grateful to those who help to manage our countryside and parks responsibly and humanely, even for animals we do not eat, such as grey squirrels that damage young trees.”
“I will give a trigger warning now, because I am going to talk about things that might upset a few people. Each year, just over 1 billion meat chickens are reared and slaughtered in the UK. I agree with the Government that all animals should be spared avoidable pain and distress at the point of killing, while also respecting the right of people to eat meat prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs. For example, a significant proportion of halal meat comes from animals that are stunned before slaughter to render them unconscious and insensible to pain. Slaughtermen are required to check for signs of consciousness between stunning and death. Certification bodies, such as the Halal Food Authority, enforce the standards through regular audits and inspections, combining ancient principles with modern safeguards.”
“I did not know that fact, and I am really grateful to my hon. Friend for sharing it. One of the challenges is the lack of profit in farming. I welcome the fact that the Labour Government have committed to help our farmers to become more profitable. One pence per egg sounds very little, but it has a heavy impact on farmers’ productivity and profitability. Similarly, we must listen carefully to farmers when considering how to move away from the use of farrowing crates for sows. While the crates are designed to protect piglets against being crushed, they also significantly restrict the sows’ movement and raise serious welfare concerns. For many animal lovers, perhaps the most challenging part of the strategy is the issue of slaughter, even for those of us who eat meat.”
“That said, the broader challenges facing veterinary practices and the cost pressures on pet owners deserve a debate in their own right. My good hon. Friend the Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire South (Johanna Baxter) has been doing a huge amount of work in this space. My constituent, David Llewellyn of Walton-on-Trent, is a strong advocate for reforming the regulations around puppy farming. I am delighted that our manifesto committed to ending puppy farming and puppy smuggling.”
“I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend, who picked the right moment because I was just about to address that issue. I met vets Kathryn and Keiran Patel in October at their newly opened independent practice in Bretby. They would like the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 to be updated. They shared with me concerning insights about how a small number of large corporates dominate the sector, particularly in relation to fees and prescription charges. In December, the Competition and Markets Authority published the provisional findings of its investigation of veterinary services for household pets, and it identified competition concerns. Many pet owners would welcome clearer pricing for common services, capped prescription charges and transparency around practice ownership.”
“It balances compassion with practicality, ambition with partnership and ethics with economic reality. From pets and farm animals to wildlife and working animals, from domestic change to global leadership, the strategy sets a clear direction of travel. Animal welfare is not a niche issue: it speaks to who we are as a society in the main. I am proud that the Labour Government are rising to the challenge, listening to constituents, working with farmers and experts, and placing animal welfare firmly at the heart of public policy. I look forward to continuing this work and to seeing our commitments translated into a real and lasting change for animals across the UK and beyond.”
“Mary Holland, who invited me to the horse-safety rides, is part of the Pass Wide and Slow campaign, which calls for better driver education to ensure that horses, riders and motorists are kept safe. I am sure campaigners would welcome provisions on that in future iterations of the animal welfare strategy. I was struck by something that Sally Barker wrote on my Facebook post when I announced the strategy before Christmas. She said that “whilst I applaud this, we are quite clearly no longer a nation of animal lovers, if we were, this would not be necessary”. That is a valid point, and it really made me sad. There will always be awful people who do not treat animals right, so I am glad that our animal welfare strategy seeks to provide protections.”
“I welcome the review of other traps, including those used indoors, while noting concerns raised by the British Pest Control Association that banning smaller traps could increase chemical use, which is a concern more broadly. My constituent Harriet Redfern contacted me after losing her beloved dog, because she believed that non-pet-friendly pesticides were to blame. Others have had similar experiences, including Lisa, who shared her anguish with me during a horse-safety ride that I attended, organised by Councillor Ann Hughes, chair of Overseal parish council. I welcome the strategy’s commitment to exploring measures to prevent equines from being exported for slaughter, but road safety is an urgent issue in the UK that affects horses and their riders, who are disproportionally women.”
“The Hunting Act 2004 is 20 years old, yet concerns persist about illegal hunting taking place under the guise of trail hunting. I have heard from farmers and landowners who oppose trail hunting due to the land damage but feel under pressure to allow it. Trail hunting was banned on National Trust land in 2022, due to animal welfare concerns, and Forestry England and several local authorities and private estates followed suit, often citing environmental damage. I am glad we are banning it altogether. I also support the Labour Government’s decision to end the use of snares. A YouGov poll in January 2025 found that 71% of adults in England believe snares should be illegal.”
“It has also called for a single point of search for cat microchipping—I must confess that I assumed that already existed. I welcome the Government’s decision to reconvene the responsible dog ownership taskforce, which provides an opportunity to reduce dog attacks and improve safety in public areas. Although I believe that the previous Government made the right decision at the time in introducing the XL bully ban, given the tragic loss of life we were seeing, I recognise the heartbreak experienced by responsible pet owners whose well-loved dogs were cherished family members. I share the Government’s concerns about the welfare implications of e-collars, and I support positive, reward-based training as the preferred approach. Later in this Parliament, we will consult on whether to ban e-collars, following the example already set in Wales.”
“However, my constituent Lexi Ireland is vice-chair of Basil’s Forever Sofa, which rescues Romanian dogs and rehomes them in the UK, and she contacted me with concerns that, unless carefully drafted, the legislation could inadvertently prevent legitimate charities from rescuing dogs with cropped ears or docked tails. I wrote to Baroness Hayman, who reassured me that all necessary exemptions will be provided through secondary legislation. I also welcome the Act’s power to prevent the supply to the UK of low-welfare pets, such as stray animals brought back from overseas holidays. Cats Protection has raised concerns that the strategy does not go far enough in delivering what it describes as “meaningful protection for cats and kittens”, particularly around irresponsible breeding, including the breeding of bully cats.”
“I absolutely join my hon. Friend in praising the Government for putting an end to puppy farming. As we discussed earlier with other concerned colleagues, it is barbaric. So many people who buy from puppy farms have been tricked into doing so. It is absolutely right to put an end to it. I am proud that the Labour Government passed the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Act 2025, which bans the import of dogs and cats under six months old, those that have been declawed or had their ears cropped, and those that are heavily pregnant.”
“I thank everybody for their contributions, and I encourage them to listen to the most recent brilliant New Scientist podcast, “The World, the Universe and Us”, in which the historian Rutger Bregman, who wrote “Moral Ambition”, asks what, in the future, we will look back on and be ashamed of. The way we treat animals is probably one of those things. I am reminded today that the animal welfare strategy is not an end game, but animal welfare is a moving goal. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the animal welfare strategy for England.”
“I have recently been asking my constituents what they think about a ban on phones in schools, as well as for their thoughts about social media for under-16s. It was clear that, regardless of their politics, they all wanted to have their views heard. They were so grateful to be asked, instead of having something imposed on them. Will the Secretary of State join me in South Derbyshire for the consultation meetings that I hope to have, so that my constituents feel that they are being heard by the decision maker right at the top?”
“I, too, have had lots of constituents contact me about this issue with concern for neurodiverse people, people with mental health issues, veterans with PTSD and animal owners. My constituent Helen sent me video footage of her border collie Alf, cowering in fear under a table. I wonder if the hon. Member agrees that in today’s modern age there are lots of beautiful alternatives for displays in the air that do not require fireworks—not to say that fireworks are not marvellous at the right time—and which can actually be silent. Does he agree that more people should be encouraged to use modern technology to deliver awe-inspiring displays?”
“In the village of Overseal in my constituency, retrospective planning permission has been submitted for a Traveller site, where unauthorised work was carried out over a bank holiday weekend, making it less likely that authorities would be made aware. They were made aware, though, and a stop notice was issued and subsequently ignored. As a country, we might need more authorised Traveller sites, but granting retrospective planning permission in such circumstances—denying residents the opportunity to challenge, and effectively presenting them with a fait accompli—is not acceptable. Such sites should not be approved through underhand tactics, when people have played the system. Can the Leader of the House help me to secure a meeting with the relevant Minister to discuss underhand use of the planning system?”
“Last week I met the brilliant Cindy Gallop, founder of MakeLoveNotPorn, and the MakeLoveNotPorn Academy who, like me and many across the House, believes in empowering people to talk openly and responsibly about sex, free from shame. Given how quickly tech is evolving, regulation, bans and blocks alone cannot shift the behaviour of people such as those using the Grok tool to make non-consensual sexual deepfakes, and a shared cross-party commitment to lifelong age-appropriate sex and relationships education is vital to changing culture, promoting consent, and preventing harm. Does my right hon. Friend agree that despite the horror stories we are currently seeing, tech is not an enemy, people are—including some tech bros like Musk—and that tech could be used for good by good people to aid lifelong sex education instead of exploitation?”
“I have enjoyed working with my hon. Friend on the Labour rural research group. We are so grateful to our farmers for engaging with us and educating us as we have gone along, so does he agree that we now have a fantastic opportunity to rebuild trust with our farmers? I have had many emails of thanks from them, and I thank the Prime Minister and the Treasury for this policy amendment. I wonder how many of my hon. Friend’s farmers have also said that, despite the fact that they have usually or often voted Conservative, they always do better under a Labour Government.”
“I thank the right hon. Member for giving way—although he is perhaps slightly less honourable because he has made false accusations about some of my colleagues, who absolutely did not do what was said.”
“I am certainly not disrespecting you, Madam Deputy Speaker; I do apologise if it came across that way. I wish to apologise to the right hon. Member if I have offended him.”
“Trans people do not wake up at 18 suddenly trans; it starts before then. When we talk about protecting children, it means protecting trans children so that they can transition into adulthood knowing that they had parents and doctors who advocated for their needs. But this trial is not a prison sentence, so will the Secretary of State talk about whether people are entitled to withdraw from it if they change their mind?”
“At one second past midnight tonight, the race for the Christmas No. 1 begins. My constituent Andrew Horth, of HorthWorld, will be in that race, with his incredible Christmas song “Merry Christmas (Make Amends)”, which was written in support of men’s mental health in the wake of our having lost Mikey Heald, another constituent of mine, back in October. Will the Leader of the House join me in wishing Andrew and HorthWorld the very best of luck, and in encouraging influencers and others to support and stream the song as much as possible?”
“There are some significant practical advantages: the ability to prove identity quickly for work; the potential to bring together passport, driving licence and national insurance details in a single secure format so that people would not need to faff around with a utility bill to prove their address anymore; and the benefits for people who currently lack traditional forms of ID. As things stand, digital ID would be mandatory only for those accessing work, although I recognise that many constituents have concerns over mission creep, which I will come back to.”
“I am pleased that through this Westminster Hall debate we are giving much-needed attention to the question of digital ID. Many of my constituents in South Derbyshire contacted me to share their views ahead of the debate. That includes well over 400 comments on a Facebook post in which I asked people for their views on digital ID —good, bad and perceived bad. Although there is a wide variety of opinion, many of my constituents have expressed concerns and it is my responsibility to communicate these here today. Let me start by recognising that about a third of South Derbyshire constituents who have been in touch on digital ID were supportive, which is almost unique—people rarely contact me to tell me that they are pleased with what I am doing.”
“I will not, I am afraid. I want to rattle through my speech. Estonia, Denmark, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands already operate digital ID systems that make everyday tasks simpler and more efficient. For some, digital ID is a natural progression for a modern, digital economy. One constituent told me: “We already use our phones and banking apps—this would simply streamline it”. If done well and offered for free, digital ID could make employment checks and even voting more accessible, but it is equally important to reflect that roughly two thirds of responses from my constituents expressed serious concerns. That has unfortunately been intensified by fearmongering, some of which have heard today from certain parliamentary colleagues, but my constituents’ message was clear: we need trust, privacy and inclusion to come first—”
“There are also concerns about costs and priorities. Many people are asking why, at a time of stretched public services, the Government would invest in a new ID system that is mandatory for workers when we already have passports, licences, national insurance numbers and so on for that purpose.”
“I will not give way, I am sorry. I am rattling through my speech. Many fear that digital ID could pave the way, however unintentionally, to increased Government surveillance or the type of social credit-style monitoring that understandably alarms people. Others raise cyber-security concerns. One constituent said: “If it can be hacked, it will be—and then what happens to our data?” I am sure lots of tech companies would be delighted to get hold of our NHS data. South Derbyshire is a rural constituency, and there are significant particularities when it comes to digital access and inclusion. Many older residents have raised concerns about their confidence in getting online and using smartphones. However, on this occasion, digital ID would thankfully be mandatory only for people accessing work.”
“I will not. The public need to feel confident that digital ID is secure, inclusive and underpinned by strong, transparent safeguards, so I look forward to hearing more from the Government about how they intend to build trust, engage openly with the public and guarantee that no one will be left behind as this technology evolves. It must also have a brilliant user experience.”
“I look forward to the forthcoming report by Baroness Batters, and I hope the Government take it seriously, because we must acknowledge a difficult truth: we have lost the trust of our farmers and they deserve, now more than ever, our utmost respect, our honesty and our unwavering support. For farmers who are elderly or terminally ill, the anti-forestalling clause in the inheritance tax policy is creating a level of distress and strain that cannot be overstated. As the Prime Minister has previously said: “If somebody makes powerful representations, then my instinct is to consider what’s being said. Getting it right is more important than ploughing on with a package which doesn’t necessarily achieve the desired outcome.” While I welcome this Budget, I plead with the Government to look again at APR and inheritance tax for farmers.”
“They remember that Labour promised no such changes before the general election and that our manifesto declared that food is the first line of defence, yet right now this country has just six days’ worth of food supplies. With global tensions rising and instability growing even closer to home in Europe, we should be doing everything possible to support the very people who help keep Britain fed. Most farmers are not wealthy land barons; they live hand to mouth on tiny and sometimes non-existent profit margins. Many were explicitly advised not to hand over their farms to their children, and they now face enormous and unexpected tax bills. For some, that means selling off land; for others, it means delaying or abandoning plans to diversify—precisely the type of innovation we should be encouraging.”
“I also thank the Chancellor for maintaining a clear and unwavering focus on fixing our NHS, because the health of our nation is the foundation of our prosperity. Many of the Budget’s measures will be felt in rural and semi-rural constituencies such as mine, and by farming families, who often feel overlooked. I am grateful for the specific concession that mitigates the impact of changes to inheritance tax for married farming couples. That is a welcome change following 13 months of campaigning by many, including farmers, the National Farmers’ Union and the Labour Rural Research Group, of which I am a proud member. However, although there is much to commend, I must also be honest: for all the good that this Budget does—and it does a lot—many farmers in my constituency simply cannot see past the broader inheritance tax changes.”
“I begin by thanking the Chancellor for the incredibly important steps that she has taken in the Budget. Five hundred and ten people in my constituency of South Derbyshire who spent their lives working in the mining industry—people who helped power our nation—will now receive a significant uplift in their BCSSS pension each month. That is life-changing support. I also welcome the measures that will lift 2,020 children in South Derbyshire out of poverty. That is not an abstract number; those are real families, who will now have a fairer start and a future with more opportunities than struggles. From next April, households will see energy bills fall by £150. At a time when every pound matters, that will make a direct difference to people’s lives.”
“Every single day that I campaigned in South Derbyshire while a candidate and since becoming an MP last July, immigration has been the No. 1 issue dividing my communities. They—we are talking about Labour voters—have been pushed either to apathy or towards Reform. I cannot thank the Home Secretary enough for the statement, because finally my constituents feel heard. How frequently can they expect an update, so that they can see that the promises being made today will result in delivery sooner, rather than later?”
“In the States, a lot of data centres have had pushback from local communities, which are seeing an increase in their energy bills. We cannot quite work out why. Will the Minister commit to work with me, DESNZ and possibly DSIT to ensure that when data centres are built as national infrastructure—because of this change in legislation—that will not mean that consumers end up paying higher prices for whatever reason? I welcome the focus on using waste heat to benefit local communities, but I feel somewhat anxious about that increase in consumer bills because of the building of data centres.”
“New House Farm school in my part of Mickleover in South Derbyshire is planned and groundwork is complete. The trigger point for the release of the section 106 funds is 314 houses, which is likely to be met in November. However, we have yet to receive a clear signal to go ahead and build the school from the Department for Education and we do not want to lose out. Will the Leader of the House please help me to get that clear signal, so that families in Mickleover and the local vicinity can be assured of their children’s education in a state-of-the-art local school?”
“South Derbyshire district council has taken the bold and rather commendable decision to ban any new property management fees, and to backdate that to January 2025. However, that does not help those who already have homes they bought before 2025. Does the hon. Lady agree that we should press our Government to legislate to help those who are tied into these arrangements to come out of them?”
“All Members have been appalled by the scenes that emerged from Gaza in the wake of the ceasefire, showing Hamas executing people in the streets as they seek to reassert control over the area. Does the Minister agree that such scenes simply reinforce that Hamas are nothing but terrorists and murderers, and that they must have nothing to do with the future governance of Palestine?”
“The number of boat crossings has risen from 800 in 2018, before we left the European Union, to 40,000 a year because of Brexit. Can the Minister provide some clarity on the measures that he is taking to help solve this immigration crisis at its core, without falling back on yet another fake silver bullet—leaving the European convention on human rights, which some Opposition parties are suggesting—which would get rid of not only the rights of asylum seekers but those of my constituents?”
“The Minister knows that I took part in the armed forces parliamentary scheme this year and last year, and I had the great privilege of visiting the NATO airbase in Poland where I saw Typhoons scramble to the skies to protect us from Russian aircraft. He rightly points out that Türkiye is an important NATO ally, and I am proud that Labour played an important part in founding NATO. Does he agree that it is shameful and wrong to suggest that NATO’s presence in eastern Europe was provocative to Putin, as the leader of Reform, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), has previously asserted?”
“Four years ago today, 17-year-old Phoebe Johnson tragically died in a car crash on the A514 in my constituency. The driver of the car she was in had only been driving for eight weeks and admitted she was too drunk to drive after leaving a house party. Phoebe’s parents Nicky and Paul said: “Our lives will never be the same again.” They are working with the Brake campaign to push for a graduated driving licence system, to improve road safety and prevent further young lives being lost. Will the Leader of the House commit Government time for this to be discussed in Parliament?”
“Pregnancy can be a worrying time for any expectant parent, and knowing they can access their GP to see a person face to face is hugely important. That was denied to my constituent, Hayley Johnson, who sadly went on to lose her baby, Evelyn, when she was delivered in an emergency at 26 weeks and six days due to a huge misdiagnosis given over the phone. With regard to maternity support specifically, what is the Minister doing to ensure that excellent maternity care is delivered in local communities so that that never happens to another family, and that when the very worst does happen and parents are suffering the loss of a baby, the support also extends to bereavement counselling?”
“Ada Lovelace taught us that imagination is the engine of invention, and if we apply the same imagination to how we build our industries, we will create not only fairer workplaces but better technology, and deliver greater economic growth for Britain.”
“It was wonderful to be asked to be on the front row at the Labour party conference recently as the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology announced that she was creating a women in tech taskforce. That is a real step forward, and I look forward to it being resourced and empowered to deliver. The priorities are clear: we need inspiration and education of the next generation, and existing people who would perhaps like a career switch; greater transparency on gender data; action to retain women mid-career; incentives for firms to embed inclusion in design and innovation; and an intersectional approach that recognises every barrier of race, class, disability and sexuality.”
“Keeping women in tech is not just a question of fairness; it is about what is right for the economy and for innovation. When women are not in the room, the consequences show. Too often, products and systems that are designed mainly by men deliver the best for men—from voice-recognition software that fails to understand women’s voices to health apps that ignore women’s biology and car safety testing still based on the male body. If we want technology for everyone, it must be designed by everyone. Right across the country there are great organisations such as InnovateHer, Stemettes, Tech She Can and Code First Girls to name just a few, which have been fighting for change for years in this field, mentoring, training and inspiring the next generation. They deserve our thanks and continued support.”
“It would be remiss of me not to mention that I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for diversity and inclusion in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, and the APPG on financial technology. I also speak today as the founder of Labour: Women in Tech, a network that brings together women from across the tech sector—and our male allies, which is super important—to push to get more women into the tech sector. We certainly need progress. I am going to talk at a rate of knots. The recent Lovelace report, published by WeAreTechWomen and Oliver Wyman, found that the UK’s tech sector is losing between £2 billion and £3.5 billion because women are leaving the industry or being pushed into non-technical roles. That is a huge waste of talent and potential.”
“It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge) for securing this debate—she beat me to it; I am absolutely delighted. It is wonderful to be here to speak in this debate commemorating Ada Lovelace Day, which was earlier this week, and was founded by Suw Charman-Anderson—it is wonderful to see her sitting in the Public Gallery. Ada Lovelace was the world’s first computer programmer—a woman who saw long before her time that technology could be both analytical and creative. She reminds us that progress in science depends not just on logic, but on imagination—on putting the “a” for arts in STEAM, because when creativity meets science, innovation truly thrives.”