Clive Jones
MP for Wokingham · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom
“Sir David was renowned for his tireless campaigning on issues ranging from animal welfare to tackling fuel poverty. He was also a passionate advocate for children with learning disabilities. He championed women with endometriosis by launching an all-party parliamentary group.”
“Social media has also transformed political debate; while it has created opportunities for engagement, it has also enabled anonymous abuse, threats against public representatives, and the rapid spread of misinformation. Such behaviour fuels hostility and weakens trust in our democratic institutions.”
“554.] The then Leader of the Opposition, the right hon. and learned Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Keir Starmer), echoed those sentiments, urging us to “use the memory of Sir David’s life…to recommit ourselves in standing for the things that he stood for…for decency in our disagreements, for kindness in our hearts, for our great democ…”
“Sir David’s killer targeted him because of his parliamentary record. This tragedy reminds us that extremism can take many forms, but its goal is always the same: to intimate, divide and undermine our democracy.”
“I want to raise a concern on behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Layla Moran). I understand that a number of MPs were not invited to a call this morning outlining the impact of local government reorganisation. I hope that the Leader of the House agrees that that was unacceptable.”
“Nearly a thousand families of children with special educational needs and disabilities are supported by Camp Mohawk and its fantastic daycare centre in my constituency.”
The complete record
Every one of 600 lines we hold for Clive Jones, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 12.
“If this summer’s free bus travel scheme for under-15s proves successful, will the Minister look to extend it for the future? It would help hard-working families in Wokingham make the most of their holiday period.”
“Nearly a thousand families of children with special educational needs and disabilities are supported by Camp Mohawk and its fantastic daycare centre in my constituency. Will the Leader of the House join me in recognising the invaluable support that charities such as Camp Mohawk provide to families in encouraging children with SEND to thrive and their families to relax?”
“The greatest tribute that we can pay to Sir David is to uphold the values he embodied: kindness, respect, public service and a belief that political differences should never diminish our common humanity. It is sad that these values no longer appear to be held by all political parties.”
“Sir David’s killer targeted him because of his parliamentary record. This tragedy reminds us that extremism can take many forms, but its goal is always the same: to intimate, divide and undermine our democracy. We must do everything we can to ensure that what happened to Jo Cox and Sir David Amess never happens again, and that elected representatives at every level can serve their communities safely and without fear. We should also remember that the members of staff and volunteers who support MPs also share the risk that public service can bring. I think of Andrew Pennington, who was killed in 2000 defending the Liberal Democrat MP for Cheltenham at a constituency surgery. We need more people in Parliament who conduct themselves as Sir David Amess did.”
“Social media has also transformed political debate; while it has created opportunities for engagement, it has also enabled anonymous abuse, threats against public representatives, and the rapid spread of misinformation. Such behaviour fuels hostility and weakens trust in our democratic institutions. There is perhaps no greater symbol of that than the murder of Jo Cox in 2016. Her killer brought political violence into sharp focus and demonstrated how extremist ideologies can erupt in an increasingly toxic atmosphere. Tragically, Sir David Amess also became a victim of political violence. In 2021, he was murdered while holding a constituency surgery, doing something he had done so many times: helping his constituents—something he was well known for and that many Members do on a regular basis.”
“554.] The then Leader of the Opposition, the right hon. and learned Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Keir Starmer), echoed those sentiments, urging us to “use the memory of Sir David’s life…to recommit ourselves in standing for the things that he stood for…for decency in our disagreements, for kindness in our hearts, for our great democracy”. —[ Official Report , 18 October 2021; Vol. 701, c. 556.] That message is as important today as it was then. In an increasingly divisive political climate, we must remember that disagreements should never come at the expense of respect. Over recent years, particularly during the Brexit debate, political discourse has become more hostile. The populist politics of misleading narratives have often deepened division, rather than encouraged understanding.”
“Sir David was renowned for his tireless campaigning on issues ranging from animal welfare to tackling fuel poverty. He was also a passionate advocate for children with learning disabilities. He championed women with endometriosis by launching an all-party parliamentary group. He spent years campaigning for Southend to be granted city status, which was achieved in 2022. Sir David’s commitment to public service earned admiration from colleagues across the House. Following his death, the then Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, described Sir David as, “one of the nicest, kindest and most gentle individuals ever to grace these Benches… our politics needs people like Sir David: dedicated, passionate, firm in his beliefs but never anything less than respectful for those who thought differently.” —[ Official Report , 18 October 2021; Vol. 701, c.”
“I want to raise a concern on behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Layla Moran). I understand that a number of MPs were not invited to a call this morning outlining the impact of local government reorganisation. I hope that the Leader of the House agrees that that was unacceptable. Today I wish to celebrate the life of Sir David Amess. Following the untimely death of the former MP Ann Widdecombe, it is appropriate to use this debate to talk about Sir David and how he conducted himself in Parliament. I did not know him personally, but I felt that I did through the television. I remember his result being announced in the early hours after the 1983 general election and seeing him many times on TV in the years that followed.”
“Driven by ego rather than diplomacy, Trump’s reckless strikes have undone weeks of negotiations with Iran and shattered hopes for a peaceful resolution. Most recently, President Trump announced plans to impose a 20% tax on shipping through the strait of Hormuz, before reversing course just a few hours later. That proposal amounted to economic extortion, a flagrant violation of international law, and would have further increased costs for UK families already struggling with the cost of living. My constituents in Wokingham are feeling the effects. Rising instability in the strait is pushing up fuel prices at a time when household energy bills remain high. Will the Minister therefore consider Liberal Democrat calls to cut fuel duty by 10p, reduce bus fares to £1, cut rail fares by 10%, and remove VAT on public electric vehicle charging?”
“I congratulate the Minister for Veterans and People, the hon. Member for Leyton and Wanstead (Mr Bailey) on his recent promotion. Most Members will agree that the repression of Iran’s population by its Government is an absolute disgrace, but Trump and Netanyahu’s illegal war on Iran has unleashed chaos across the region. This conflict, backed by the leaders of both the Conservative party and Reform UK, has put British nationals directly in harm’s way. Renewed US and Iranian strikes now risk damaging the region, dragging it back into full-scale war. Trump’s actions have caused immense suffering across the middle east, and have had real consequences for the people of Wokingham and across the UK. The conflict also reminds us that we cannot neglect our relationships with our European allies and that we cannot rely on Trump.”
“The Government must do all they can to encourage the United States and Iran to return to negotiations, restore stability in the strait of Hormuz and work towards ending this devastating conflict.”
“I will not; I would like to carry on. Iran’s continued attacks on vessels in the strait are fuelling instability. The conflict shows little sign of ending while Trump refuses to acknowledge that military escalation has failed and admit that he was wrong. His reckless and unpredictable approach should strengthen the Government’s resolve to deepen co-operation with our reliable European allies. It is for those reasons that I urge the Government to back the Liberal Democrat proposal for a new growth and defence partnership with the European Union. Such a partnership would strengthen our economy, reinforce our security and help Britain respond more effectively to international crises.”
“Quality and consistency of care are vital in improving cancer outcomes. How will the cancer manuals support earlier diagnosis, and will they include specific guidance to improve outcomes for children and young people?”
“Residents in Wokingham are absolutely sick of the failures of Thames Water’s management. In 2025 alone, Thames Water committed 74 sewage spills, for a duration of 684 hours. That means that Thames Water dumped sewage for the equivalent of 456 football matches, and there were certainly no clean sheets. No waterway in Wokingham is safe—”
“Modelling by the Lobular Moon Shot Project suggests that preventing or delaying metastasis in even a relatively small number of patients would more than offset the proposed £20 million investment through reduced treatment costs. I know that many across the cancer community are eagerly awaiting the Government’s workforce plan. Can the Minister update the House on when it might be published? In closing, I urge the Government to support the Lobular Moon Shot Project and commit £20 million to improve research, diagnosis and treatment for invasive lobular breast cancer. I also once again pay tribute to Dr Susan Michaelis, without whose tireless campaigning, I doubt we would be here today debating this issue or pressing for the change that so many patients and families deserve.”
“The Lobular Moon Shot Project is calling for £20 million over five years to fund lobular-specific research. In the grand scheme of things, £20 million over five years is not a lot of money, and that investment would deepen understanding of the disease, support the development of targeted therapies, and improve diagnosis and treatment for thousands of patients. Without it, progress will remain far too slow. The project estimates that 3.75 million people worldwide will be diagnosed with invasive lobular breast cancer over the next decade, making need for action so very urgent. The investment also represents good value.”
“I hope that the Minister this afternoon will be able to give us some idea of whether the Government listened to us all those months ago and whether they are listening today, because very little appears to have changed. Invasive lobular breast cancer is the second most common type of breast cancer, with between 7,500 and 8,000 people diagnosed every year in the UK. That is around 22 women every day. Despite accounting for around one in seven breast cancer diagnoses, this form of the disease remains under-researched with no specifically designed treatment. As a result, patients are often treated with therapies known to be less effective for lobular tumours, increasing the risk of metastatic disease, greater toxicity and poorer outcomes. That is not inevitable. With targeted research, outcomes can improve.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne) for securing this important debate. I pay tribute to everyone who has campaigned tirelessly on this issue. When I met the Lobular Moon Shot Project team in April, their determination to improve outcomes for patients was unmistakeable. The debate is also an opportunity to remember Dr Susan Michaelis on the first anniversary of her passing. After being diagnosed with invasive lobular breast cancer in 2011, Susan devoted her final years to advancing research into this awful disease. In 2023, she founded the Lobular Moon Shot Project, and in December 2024, many colleagues and I spoke in a Westminster Hall debate to echo the project’s call for greater investment in lobular breast cancer research.”
“In 2025, sewage was dumped into the Ashridge stream, Emm brook, Barkham brook and the River Loddon in my constituency. Residents are thoroughly fed up with Thames Water’s repeated pollution and lack of accountability. Will the Government introduce mutual ownership of water companies, professionally managed, to put customers and the environment first?”
“Too many abusers escape justice in court, leaving victims, including my constituents, without proper justice. In May, I called for the mandatory involvement of independent domestic violence advisers in the family court process. In response, the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson), said: “It cannot be warm words; there needs to be action.”— —[ Official Report, 21 May 2026; Vol. 786, c. 37WH.] What steps have the Government taken to make independent domestic advisers mandatory in family courts, to help deliver justice?”
“The Minister is being generous in giving way. I have met people in Wokingham who are affected by the scandal. It does not just affect the person infected; it affects their family as well. My constituent is adamant that the effect on their spouse must be recognised. Does the Minister agree that the Government should give clarity on whether the spouses of those infected should receive their own separate compensation?”
“It is very clear that the Minister agrees that the infected blood scandal is a tragic disaster and a failure of public service. The Government must ensure that it never happens again and must strengthen any accountability measures that they can. Does he agree with me and many of the survivors that there must be a duty of candour on all public officials that is robustly enforced?”
“Instead, the Government should be looking to provide at least 200 additional machines; that is what is required to tackle the backlog and ensure timely diagnosis and treatment. That is why my Liberal Democrat colleagues and I have called for a 10-year capital investment programme so that every cancer patient can benefit from faster, more accurate diagnostics and treatment. What further plans do the Government have to invest in both the workforce and the equipment needed to improve breast cancer outcomes? We know that breast cancer screening works and that early diagnosis saves lives. Now the Government must ensure that everyone can benefit by improving uptake and providing the investment that our cancer services urgently need.”
“Will the Minister outline what plans the Government might have to increase screening uptake, particularly through community-based services? Improving uptake alone, though, is not enough. Serious workforce shortages and outdated equipment continue to delay diagnosis and treatment. Too much diagnostic equipment is ageing or even no longer fit for purpose. Many areas face shortages of radiotherapy capacity, faulty mammography equipment and insufficient staff to operate machines consistently. I have long called for greater investment in the NHS workforce, including during a debate in Westminster Hall last year. Although I welcome the Government’s national cancer plan, the commitment to provide 28 new radiotherapy machines falls well short of what is actually needed.”
“Cancer Research UK found that concerns about pain are the most common barrier to attending. Others miss invitations, struggle to find the time or remain unconvinced of the benefits. Uptake is even lower in deprived communities, worsening existing inequalities in cancer outcomes. In England in 2025, screening uptake was 65% in the most deprived areas, compared with 75% in the least deprived areas. The Government need to work on ideas to improve access to screening, particularly where uptake is lowest. Simple measures such as follow-up invitations, culturally appropriate information and community-based pop-up screening services could make a real difference by meeting people where they are and at times that work for them.”
“Between visits to the GP, the cancer spread to my lymph glands. The result of that spread still causes issues for me today, 18 years later. Thankfully my treatment was successful, but many others are not so fortunate because of delays in diagnosis. More than 95% of people diagnosed at stage 1 survive for at least five years compared with around 25% diagnosed at stage 4. That is why breast screening is so important. The Marmot review estimated that the current screening programme prevents around 1,300 deaths every year, yet uptake remains too low, particularly in England, where rates lag behind the devolved nations and pre-pandemic levels. Almost 30% of eligible women are not attending screening appointments. Around 600,000 women are missing the opportunity for early detection.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Vickers. I thank the hon. Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) for presenting this important debate and the Minister for attending. I congratulate Gemma Reeves on organising this well-supported petition and her campaigning on this very important issue. Being diagnosed with breast cancer is a bewildering and terrifying experience for far too many people, as many of us know. Breast cancer is the most common cancer in the UK. Around 60,000 people are diagnosed with breast cancer every year, and one in seven women will receive such a diagnosis during their lifetime. Early diagnosis is crucial. Detecting breast cancer sooner gives people the best chance of successful treatment and ultimately saves lives. In my own case, I had to visit my GP twice before receiving a diagnosis.”
“Lung cancer screening is one of the most effective public health interventions introduced in recent years. It is saving lives, reducing inequalities and shifting diagnosis toward earlier, more treatable stages of the disease, but its future success depends on stability, protecting funds, a sustainable workforce, robust Government and UK-wide implementation. The Government have an opportunity to secure the future of a programme that is already transforming outcomes for thousands of people. The UK Lung Cancer Coalition believes that doing so is essential if we are to achieve the ambition of a 35% five-year survival rate by 2035.”
“The British Thoracic Society has called for at least one specialist tobacco adviser in every hospital. As the Government pursues its smoke-free 2030 ambitions, the NHS has a critical role to play in helping people to quit smoking. The Institute of Clinical Research has highlighted workforce challenges in biomarker testing and molecular diagnostics, both of which are increasingly important for personalised cancer treatment. As I have repeatedly argued in this House, the national cancer plan can succeed only if its ambitions are matched by investment in the workforce needed to deliver them. When will the Government publish their delayed workforce plan and how will they support the continued expansion of lung cancer screening? Will Ministers commit to increase training places in radiology, pathology and thoracic surgery?”
“Timely diagnostic and treatment services must be available so that patients diagnosed with early-stage disease can access potentially curative treatment. Demand for thoracic surgery is also rising, as early-stage lung cancers are often best treated surgically. Without sufficient capacity, opportunities to cure may be lost. Greater awareness among GPs remains important too. Around one in five lung cancers occur in people who have never smoked—indeed never-smoked lung cancer is now the eighth most common cancer in the UK and the seventh most common worldwide—but smoking cessation remains a vital part of the screening programme. Smoking causes around 72% of lung cancer cases in the UK, making cessation support one of the most cost-effective interventions available.”
“The programme’s roll-out, data systems and clinical governance arrangements require continuity, and many charities and organisations across the cancer sector are concerned about potential loss of expertise during organisational change. What safeguards are in place to ensure continuity of leadership, data management and programme oversight throughout the transition? Thirdly, workforce pressures remain one of the greatest threats to the programme being sustained. Screening increases demand across radiology, pathology, thoracic surgery and genomics, yet workforce planning has not kept pace. The Royal College of Radiologists has warned that there will not be enough radiologists to support the programme by 2030.”
“Cost-cutting pressures on ICBs threaten to undermine progress. There are reports that high-performing screening teams—some seeing 55 patients a day—are being disrupted, and that screening resources are being diverted elsewhere. The variation in delivery across the country is striking. Lung cancer screening funding should be used for lung cancer screening, and local structures should not be allowed to dilute a programme that is demonstrably working well. Will Ministers issue clear guidance to ICBs to prevent interference in delivery? Will they guarantee that screening funding is to be ringfenced and used solely for its intended purposes? Will they ensure that ongoing ICB restructuring does not weaken accountability or performance? Secondly, the abolition of NHS England raises legitimate concerns.”
“Wales is preparing to launch a programme in 2027, but Scotland and Northern Ireland remain significantly behind. The UK Lung Cancer Coalition is supporting discussions in both nations later this year to understand the barriers and encourage implementation. Lung cancer is the UK’s biggest cancer killer. Every eligible person, regardless of where they live, should have access to the same opportunities for early diagnosis. I urge the devolved Governments to learn from England’s experiences and introduce screening as quickly as possible. Will the Minister engage with counterparts in Scotland and Northern Ireland to encourage progress towards UK-wide implementation? There are several threats to the programme’s success. First, there are growing concerns about integrated care board interference and the lack of ringfenced funding.”
“That progress should continue, supported by investment in community engagement and communications to ensure that hard-to-reach populations are not left behind. Given the importance of reducing inequalities, will the Minister confirm whether lung cancer screening will move to section 7A arrangements with ringfenced funding beyond 2030? There is also concern about maintaining political momentum. With both drivers behind the national cancer plan no longer in post and Cabinet changes expected in the next few weeks, many in the cancer community are understandably concerned about whether the commitment will continue. I am sure the Minister will reaffirm his commitment. England is leading the way, but early detection must not become a postcode lottery across the UK.”
“Will the Government reaffirm their commitment to a national roll-out timetable and ensure that the programme continues at pace? The national cancer plan commits to reaching 100% of the eligible population by 2030. That timetable matters because any slowdown risks reversing progress on early diagnosis. Unlike other national screening programmes, lung cancer screening does not yet have guaranteed funding beyond 2030. If this programme is to remain stable and effective, it needs protected long-term funding. We must also continue to evaluate reporting systems, national databases, turnaround times, workforce capacity and how screening is tailored to local populations. Importantly, screening is helping to reduce health inequalities by focusing on areas of deprivation.”
“I place on record my thanks to the NHS cancer programme team, lung cancer advisers and the lung cancer screening clinical expert group for delivering the fastest roll-out of lung cancer screening anywhere in the world. The benefits of screening extend beyond lung cancer. Screening is also identifying conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and cardiovascular disease, potentially saving even more lives. Since I applied for this debate, the Department has committed in the national cancer plan to a timetable for the full roll-out of the programme. That is a significant achievement. The inclusion of screening in the NHS app is another welcome step, but we cannot be complacent simply because a roll-out is promised in a plan.”
“The UKLCC has now set an ambition of 35% of patients surviving five years after diagnosis by 2035—a target once thought to be impossible, but now within reach thanks to screening. The Government’s decision to roll out fully the targeted national lung cancer screening programme in England for people aged 55 to 74 with a smoking history was a major milestone. To date, that programme has identified more than 10,600 lung cancers, with over 75% diagnosed at an early, treatable stage, compared with just 28% before screening was introduced. Without doubt, lung cancer screening is saving lives. It is cancer prevention in action and exemplifies the shift toward earlier diagnosis set out in the NHS 10-year plan.”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered the national lung cancer screening programme. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. I declare an interest as a governor of the Royal Berkshire hospital. A family member also holds shares in a medical company. Lung cancer is a rapidly fatal disease that kills nearly 33,000 people in the UK every year. Fortunately, targeted lung cancer screening has become one of the NHS’s real success stories, with Lord Darzi highlighting it as the only initiative across all cancers that has improved rates of early-stage diagnosis in recent years. Screening is without doubt the single biggest intervention in improving lung cancer survival. When the UK Lung Cancer Coalition was launched in 2005, five-year survival stood at around 8% which was among the lowest rates in Europe.”
“I know that he is here on behalf of the Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, the hon. Member for Washington and Gateshead South (Mrs Hodgson), who is, I know, a real champion for improving cancer care in this country. I think it is great that the Government are committing £650 million for lung cancer screening in England to be spent by 2030, but what about Scotland and Northern Ireland? Is the Minister able to make a commitment that the Department will speak to the devolved Governments of Scotland and Northern Ireland to try to get them to implement what has been done so well in England, or does he need to speak to the Under-Secretary of State? We did not get a guarantee that lung cancer—”
“Friend also talked about the speed and quality of treatment, and how important it is that we are quick with our diagnoses, that we are quick with our treatment and that our cancer patients have the support of specialist nurses. The hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans) is absolutely right that early detection is crucial in lung cancer treatment, as he knows from being a junior doctor once upon a time. He is also right to say that the origin of the screening programme was under the Conservatives in 2023, and he is right to join other Members in asking for lung screening to be spread out to all parts of the United Kingdom. I thank the Minister for coming to the debate today and for answering an awful lot of the questions that we asked him.”
“I would just like to mention a few of the things that hon. Members have spoken about. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) was absolutely right to pay tribute to the Government for their work on lung cancer screening. That is an outstanding success, but screening still needs more support from the Government because, as he says, screening saves lives. My hon. Friend the Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) talked about lung cancer being horrific and deadly, and he spoke about his constituent John, who probably thought, when he got his diagnosis, “This is going to be horrific and deadly for me.” Because of the lung cancer screening programme, it looks like he might have a few good years ahead of him, so that is really good. My hon.”
“A lot of people who talk about cancer, including Members of Parliament and cancer charities, know that there has to be a big expansion of radiography sooner rather than later. Finally, I would like to thank you for chairing the meeting, Sir Alec, and for pulling me up on my mistake. I shall endeavour to do better next time. Question put and agreed to . Resolved , That this House has considered the national lung cancer screening programme.”
“I apologise, Sir Alec. The Minister did not need to intervene. I am sure he will take that message back to his colleague. What we would like to see, which was not mentioned in the Minister’s speech, is a guarantee that lung cancer screening funding will be ringfenced and used only for lung cancer screening. There was no comment on the changes in the integrated care boards and NHS England or on what safeguards are in place to ensure continuity of leadership, data management and programme oversight during the organisational changes. I am sure the Minister and other Ministers know that is a big concern for a lot of charities. There was no mention of expanding radiology.”
“Public procurement must do more to support SMEs in Wokingham and across the UK who are doing their best to grow, despite what many see as a lack of help from the Government. In defence, only 5% of the procurement budget is allocated to SMEs. How will the Government change public procurement to benefit SMEs and the economy?”
“Pubs are the lifeblood of our local communities. In Wokingham, we are very lucky to have so many great pubs. To try to help them, I ran my “Wokingham’s Best Pub” competition, recognising the value of pubs and their staff. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating The Two Poplars, which won the best pub competition last Friday, and, as I know he likes to support local pubs, will he consider joining me for a pint in The Two Poplars, where he will find good beer and good food?”
“How can anyone think that a £5 million gift with no strings attached, or whatever the reason for the gift is, can be nothing to do with anyone except the recipient? These attitudes in our politics are very dangerous. Politicians should represent and be accountable to their constituents first and foremost—not some millionaire, or even billionaire, who may or may not pay UK taxes. Politicians cannot afford to take voters for granted as successive Labour and Conservative Governments have. We need to repair the damage of years of sleaze, cronyism and rule-breaking and end the era of neglect. We need a political system with fair representation that makes politics work for all our constituents again.”
“As a party, we have spearheaded the campaign for electoral reform in Parliament. Electoral reform is by no means a panacea for this country’s problems, but a much better, more democratic electoral system is a fundamental step towards politicians representing the country properly. That is why this Government must replace the first-past-the-post system with proportional representation for both general and local elections in England. Democracy can be revived by strengthening our democratic institutions and by taking the big money out of politics. The Government need to cap donations to political parties and stop foreign oligarchs and crypto billionaires interfering in our democracy.”
“People in Wokingham and across the country want to know that they will be represented in Parliament by somebody they have an affinity with, and they want their vote to have counted. As a very young teenager, still at school and unable to vote, I witnessed the general election of February 1974. I wanted the Liberals to win. They increased their vote to 18%, and their seats in the House of Commons increased from eight to 14. If the result had been proportional, they should have had 110 Members, and it would have been a properly balanced Parliament, which I am sure would have dealt with the issues of the day better than the Wilson and Callaghan Governments. I saw that as a massive injustice, and it helped to drive my interest in politics. My Lib Dem colleagues and I have long called for fair votes through proportional representation.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) for securing this important debate. Our politics is not fit for purpose and is not working for people up and down the country. It is becoming increasingly adversarial and divisive. The first-past-the-post system actively encourages parties not to work together, which allows the Government to avoid accountability and ignore the voices of the people who put them into Parliament. I have heard from so many of my constituents in Wokingham who are sick of feeling ignored by politics in Westminster and feel that the system—and, therefore, the Government—does not work for them.”
“I associate myself with the Prime Minister’s remarks. His Government can be really proud of the national cancer plan. Cancer patients in Wokingham and across the country cannot afford for it not to be implemented or regularly updated. Will the Prime Minister leave a lasting legacy and support my private Member’s Bill—the National Cancer Strategy Bill—to ensure that future Governments remain accountable for delivering the plan’s targets and ambitions?”