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 3 of 12.
“It is a strategy routinely weaponised by abusers and often backed by unregulated experts who have no place in the courtroom. These bogus allegations can often lead to a child being removed from a safe parent and transferred to an abusive one. That is precisely why independent domestic violence advisers and the newly created children’s domestic abuse advocates are needed as experts. They can help courts to distinguish genuine safeguarding concerns from manipulative litigation tactics and identify patterns of coercive and post-separation abuse that might otherwise be missed. At the centre of all of this is children. Children are not passive witnesses to domestic abuse.”
“I also want to address concerns surrounding the recent removal of the presumption of parental involvement in cases involving abuse. While many survivors and safeguarding organisations welcomed the reform, there is concern that some perpetrators may increasingly attempt to weaponise allegations against survivors by claiming that they themselves are the victims of abuse, or by claiming parental alienation in response to genuine safeguarding concerns. Domestic abuse specialists like Kaleidoscopic UK have long warned that allegations of so-called parental alienation can be used to discredit survivors and shift attention away from abuse allegations. The charity Right to Equality undertook a survey on child removals and found that 81% of mothers who had their child removed were accused of parental alienation.”
“A survivor may therefore find themselves portrayed as hostile, manipulative or obstructive, and genuine attempts to protect children can be reframed by perpetrators as attempts to alienate a child from the other parent. That is one reason why specialist expertise in the courts is so important. In a child custody case, a constituent of mine was told by a judge to stop making reports of domestic abuse against the ex-partner as it had no relevance to the case, despite their being presented with police reports. The ex-partner also used manipulative DARVO tactics and eventually gained custody of the child. Intimidated by the process, my constituent’s experience highlights the urgent need for stronger protection and specialist expertise in court.”
“The hon. Member is absolutely right: somebody should not be rewarded when they have been difficult for months and months—probably years—and then at the last minute change their mind to get a reduced sentence. The judge probably sees them as being helpful, but they have not been helpful for a long time. The hon. Member makes a really good point. Some have described the family courts process as very traumatising. We must recognise sophisticated tactics like DARVO—deny, attack, and reverse victim and offender—where perpetrators deny the abuse, attack the credibility of the survivor and then present themselves as the true victim.”
“I start by apologising to the Minister for not welcoming her to her new position. I am pleased that she reiterated the Government’s commitment to halving domestic abuse in 10 years, which I am sure we all want to see. I have a couple of questions that came up in the debate. The hon. Member for Gravesham (Dr Sullivan) spoke about the lack of expertise in working with children with special needs. Will the Minister write to all of us who have contributed to the debate on what the Government might be able to do about that specifically? The hon. Member for Wokingham—”
“Is that something the Minister will champion over the next few years? The hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle (Dr Mullan) talked about how important it is to get it right and about the need for a cultural shift. I am sure the Minister has lots of ideas, and I know her predecessor did. It would be nice to hear about them. Finally, I thank the Minister for coming, and for confirming that the welfare of children must always be paramount. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered domestic abuse and safeguarding within the family justice system.”
“It is so easy to make that mistake. My hon. Friend the Member for Woking (Mr Forster) spoke about the good work of lots of local organisations, but he has real concerns that council changes over the next few years will put the funding for the work of those organisations in jeopardy. Could the Minister tell us what she may be able to do about that? My hon. Friend also spoke about the need for IDVAs, as I and several others did. Is that something the Minister could support over the next year or so? The hon. Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Alison Hume) said that children’s voices are not heard in the family court system. How can we, as MPs, and the Minister make sure they are heard over the next few years? My hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall (Ben Maguire) spoke about domestic abuse training for everybody in the family courts.”
“The national cancer plan has many ambitious and urgently needed targets, but they will only be delivered when the Government properly invest in the NHS workforce. Healthcare professionals and charities want clarity on when the Government will commit to this. Can the Leader of the House urge his colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care to update the House on when the workforce plan will be launched?”
“Life science companies such as Becton Dickinson in my constituency play a key role in advancing the research and innovation that will help deliver the national cancer plan and transform cancer care. What is the Minister doing to increase funding on research and development for life science companies such as those in my constituency?”
“One school in my constituency is concerned about a year 6 pupil with significant support needs. As a result of his progress, with the school’s help, he has been assessed as not needing specialist provision at secondary school, which his teachers feel to be wrong. What will the Minister do to ensure that children are not punished for the success of their previous schools when making the transition to other schools?”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. I congratulate the hon. Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) for securing this important debate. There are six park home estates in my constituency. They provide vital accommodation and a strong sense of community among residents who take pride in their homes and their estates. This debate raises a fundamental issue of fairness. Many of my park home residents are retirees, often on fixed incomes. Many downsize into park homes precisely to release equity, reduce costs and secure greater financial stability. When they come to sell their home, the requirement to hand over 10% of the sale price to the site owner causes real distress.”
“No group of homeowners should face a system that strips away rights and imposes disproportionate financial penalties. It is time to bring fairness back into the system. That is why I support the PHOJC’s calls for the 10% charge to be ended without delay or replaced with a fairer system that does not penalise residents. Changes should also be made to ensure that park home residents have the same protection and fair treatment as all other homeowners, bringing park home living in line with normal consumer and housing rights.”
“I agree 100%. It is not a small administrative fee: it can amount to tens of thousands of pounds. That charge exists outside the protections that most homeowners take for granted. In the mainstream housing market, sellers are protected by competition and choice. Estate agent fees are negotiated. Services must be delivered to justify the costs and, if someone does not like the terms, they can walk away. Park home residents do not have that freedom. We would not accept this in any other part of the housing system—we would not accept a mandatory 10% charge simply for the right to sell our own homes. People delay moving closer to their families and put off downsizing further. Even when their health declines, some remain in homes that no longer meet their needs simply because they cannot afford to lose such a large portion of their asset.”
“Twelve weeks ago, I raised four cases with the DWP, and I am still waiting for a response, despite chasing. These delays are upsetting for my Wokingham constituents. What is the Minister doing to address this backlog, and when can my constituents expect a response?”
“In February, it was announced in the national cancer plan that a rare cancers clinical lead and a rare cancers research lead would be appointed, but no time frame was given for these appointments. These new positions are key to progressing outcomes for people with rare cancers, who have been left out of previous cancer plans. Can the Leader of the House make time for a Health Minister to update the House on progress with these appointments?”
“Cancer Research UK’s manifesto for cancer research and care in Scotland recommends that the Government should increase “strategic institutional research and innovation funding…investing in and supporting the delivery of a new Scottish Health and Biomedicine Institute (SHBI) to deliver new innovations that will benefit people and the economy in Scotland.” What is the Minister doing to support that manifesto?”
“The Minister tells us that the trustees will be in the driving seat, but for the pre-1997 pensioners, trustees have never been in the driving seat. In most cases, trustees cannot compel discretionary increases. They cannot even advocate effectively for those who have already lost out, and they cannot override employers’ decisions. The imbalance is clear: employers decide, trustees administer. Trustees are told that it is not their role to seek to change benefits for pre-1997 pensioners. What is the value of a trustee? Surely it is not just to be a rubber stamp for boards of directors, usually based inthe USA.”
“Many will not live long enough to see any redress, but their survivors will receive a fraction of the pension at a time when food costs are projected to go up by 9% this year alone, and who knows what will happen with energy costs. What is particularly difficult to justify is the piecemeal nature and inconsistency of the Government’s approach. They have been entirely willing to mandate how defined-contribution schemes invest, yet they remain unwilling to mandate even basic fairness for the 17% of defined-benefit pensioners whose sponsoring companies are following a law and avoiding doing the right thing. The Lords amendment would return us to a Bill that would make it easier to extract surpluses from defined benefit schemes.”
“Imagine being legally cheated out of your pension by your country’s Government and then ignored when you plead your case. Finally, 750,000 people in private defined-benefit schemes, the pre-1997 pensioners, have also lost out. We are talking about 979,000 people—almost 1 million pensioners—who have lost out on the regular increase for part, or for the whole part, of their pension. The Bill is trying to paper over an enormous crack in our national pension framework. Ministers themselves have acknowledged the problem for pre-1997 pensioners. Most recently, the Minister confirmed that around 17% of defined-benefit pensioners have not received discretionary increases—in some cases, for nearly 30 years. It is not a minor anomaly. Many have lost more than half the real value of the pensions they have earned.”
“I wish to speak to Lords amendment 15 and, ultimately, what it still fails to address: the long-standing injustice faced by almost 1 million pensioners. The Chancellor’s decision last year diverted attention, with her announcement of the restoration of indexation to a quarter of a million pensioners in some of the schemes in the PPF. While 250,000 now have their indexation back, 90,000 in the PPF do not. In addition to the 90,000 who have lost out, there are 139,000 in the financial assistance scheme. Some of those pensioners were once part of the civil service where functions were privatised. I specifically refer to members of the AEA Technology and Carillion public sector pension schemes, who were promised that their civil service pensions would be honoured after privatisation.”
“Why has that not been done before? Pensioners are dying at a rate of 15 a week. Delay at this point is not neutral: it is a choice to delay, deny and wait until they die. Those pensioners have families. What message does the pension failure send to young people about the security of pensions? If the House can legislate in detail on how pensions are invested, it can legislate to ensure that surplus extraction does not come at the expense of those who have already borne nearly 30 years of erosion. I end with a direct question for the Minister. Will he commit to ensuring that secondary legislation requires that each scheme seeking surplus extraction must have an independent professional examination of the effect of pre-1997 pension erosion, and that funds will be withheld to ensure restoration of full pension value for pre-1997 pensioners?”
“For the pre-1997 pensioners in companies such as Hewlett Packard and many others, the trustees are not able to act on behalf of the pensioners because a board, usually in the USA, says, “No, we are not going to give you a pension increase, even though the trustees say you should have it.” To ease surplus extraction without first addressing that injustice risks locking it in permanently. It is the wrong thing to do. Once surplus is removed, there may be no realistic prospect of restoring the value lost by pre-1997 pensioners. There will not be any spare cash available to restore their pensions. The spare cash will have gone to the company with the Minister’s blessing. The Minister said, during the Adjournment debate on 19 March, that there was a need to build the evidence base, but decades have already passed.”
“T4. Last week, the Secretary of State announced £10 million for the Royal Berkshire hospital to fund a new site, which is very welcome news. After years of Conservative neglect, £400 million is needed to maintain the existing Royal Berks until rebuilding starts in 2039. What is the Minister doing to support the hospital and its excellent staff to help fix its many maintenance issues?”
“I join others in thanking the Minister for his update. I met a constituent in Wokingham last year who was one of the 30,000 people affected by this scandal. The Infected Blood Compensation Authority should have been life-changing for them and others affected by the scandal, but when an offer of compensation was made, my constituent felt that they had to accept it, although they felt it was not good enough, and that they were under duress. Will the Minister meet me and my constituent to discuss this case and the fact that my constituent felt pressurised to accept the offer?”
“With the rise of the right in this country, that expansion of power leaves the potential for future Governments to misuse them to suppress and stamp out all forms of protest, strikes and demonstrations. Our fundamental right to peaceful protest, which has existed for many years, must be safeguarded against any attempt to constrict it.”
“I will speak to Lords amendment 312 on cumulative disruption. I am deeply alarmed by the amendment, which would require senior police officers to take into account any so-called cumulative impacts of frequent protests on local areas when considering whether to impose conditions on public processions and assemblies. In short, the Government are giving the police unprecedented powers to restrict or prohibit protests that they expect to be too disruptive. That is an unacceptable attack on our democracy. These powers represent a significant expansion of state authority and risk undermining long-standing democratic freedoms. They also set a dangerous precedent for the suppression of dissent and inhibit people’s legitimate right to peaceful protest.”
“Finally, I thank all prison officers, past and present, who have worked tirelessly to protect their colleagues and the public, and who have supported the rehabilitation of prisoners and offenders into our society.”
“Ministers have said that they will make new protective vests mandatory in close supervision centres and separation centres, which hold the most dangerous offenders. They then said that more evidence was needed before rolling out the vests to prison officers. It is a welcome step forward that the Lord Chancellor recently announced a big increase in protective body armour for frontline officers, but more needs to be done to ensure that all prison officers have the protection they need to do their job safely and effectively. Having the relevant protective vest will help to improve prison officers’ mental health. No one should feel unsafe when fulfilling their professional duties, working in a prison, and of course, any changes must always be made in consultation with the officers themselves.”
“On top of that strain, in September 2025 it was reported that hundreds of prison officers recruited from abroad may lose their jobs and be forced to return to their homelands due to changes to the Labour Government’s immigration policy. That shift came after the Prison Service began sponsoring skilled worker visas for overseas applicants to address staff shortages. To put that in numbers, according to the Prison Governors Association, more than 1,000 prison officers—nearly 5% of the workforce—have a limited right to work in the UK and are reliant on a skilled worker visa to continue. If that solution to the staffing crisis is in danger, the Government need to do more to protect prison officers and provide the support they need so that they do not leave the service.”
“It is clear that prison officers do not feel properly supported at the time when they need it most: when they are actually at work. The crisis in the prison system is also linked to serious staffing issues. The Justice Committee found that the prison operational workforce has struggled with recruitment, retention and sickness in recent years. As of 30 June 2025, there were 22,702 band 3 to band 5 prison officers in post, with a leaving rate of 11.6%. Despite the recruitment of new officers, the number of prison officers decreased by 4% on the previous year. Those are signs of a workforce seriously struggling to cope in a crumbling prison system.”
“There is an average of 28 assaults on staff every day in the prison system. In the 12 months to March 2025, the rate of assaults was 7% higher than in the 12 months to March 2024—a new peak of 10,568 assaults on staff. The crisis of severe overcrowding in the prison system is clearly taking its toll on staff. In 2024, England’s prisons lost almost 150,000 working days due to mental health related sickness—a 44% increase since 2019. What support do prison officers get? According to the Ministry of Justice, all prison officers have access to mental health support, including a 24-hour helpline, but the Prison Officers Association has said that it has consistently called on the service to fund specialist on-site mental health support.”
“My dad worked as a prison officer at Maidstone, and then at the infamous Dartmoor prison in Devon where there were notorious criminals including Frank Mitchell, who was involved with the Kray twins. My dad then moved to Albany prison on the Isle of Wight, which became a maximum security prison. He was looking after many IRA criminals, which made the job particularly stressful as they regularly rioted and caused problems. He then moved to Reading prison, which is how I came to live in the Wokingham area. During his career, my dad was under immense stress and pressure, often working very long hours with others to look after notorious, violent criminals on a daily basis. From my dad’s experience, I know that stress and safety fears were constant concerns that wore him and many others down. Violence is unacceptably high in prisons.”
“It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mr Betts. I thank the right hon. Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis) for securing this very important debate. Our prison system has been pushed into a deep crisis by years of neglect and mismanagement under previous Governments. Prisons are overcrowded, understaffed and unable to properly rehabilitate offenders. Attacks on prison officers, including on three officers at HMP Frankland last April, shine a light on the consequences of a prison system left overstretched and under-resourced by previous Governments. I know at first hand the impact that the stressful environment can have: my dad was a prison officer for nearly 20 years, following his 22 years of service in the Army, which included serving in the second world war.”
“Wokingham borough council is the lowest funded unitary authority. Between 2020 and 2022 when the Conservatives led the council, they cut the road maintenance budget by £2 million, although they seem to have no recollection of doing so. Now the Labour Government are cutting £43 million from the council’s funding for the next three years. What steps is the Minister taking to provide councils like Wokingham with the funding they need to maintain safe roads, despite being drained of cash by the Government?”
“Two people a day are diagnosed with cancer during or right after pregnancy, yet their maternity leave cannot be deferred. That means that mums are missing out on precious time bonding with their baby—time they will never get back—as they undergo urgent and necessary treatment. It is clear that legislation must be changed to properly support mothers with cancer, so will the Leader of the House allow a debate in Government time on the merits of allowing mothers to defer maternity leave until their cancer treatment is complete?”
“I call on the Government to remove barriers to global research talent coming to the UK, and commit to a decade-long programme of public investment in research and development. Shockingly, SUDC UK found that just half of the families affected by SUDC were assigned a bereavement key worker. Many parents had distressing experiences when dealing with authorities who offered little support. To increase support for families, Liberal Democrats are calling for the funding for bereavement support payments to be doubled, reversing cuts by the previous Government. I would like to end by again thanking my constituents for giving me their time to share their story with me and highlighting the clear need for urgent change.”
“I was struck by their bravery to share their story with me in the face of such tragedy. Hearing about the pain of losing their child and not knowing why, I was struck again by their strength and determination that something needed to be done. In my meeting with them, it was made clear that a serious lack of research and awareness around SUDC has left parents without support or answers. The parents are calling for research to focus: on detailed post-mortem studies; assessing hidden biological vulnerabilities by focusing on genomic sequencing and family history; neurology and sleep-related mechanisms; and environmental and situational factors. Sadly, most active research appears to be taking place in the US, with very little happening here in the UK.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir John. I thank the hon. Member for Rossendale and Darwen (Andy MacNae) for securing this very important debate. First, I would like to recognise the work done by organisations such as SUDC UK that have campaigned on this issue to raise awareness of a very tragic problem. Their work is even more admirable given that so many of the people involved have themselves been affected by SUDC. The loss of a child is one of the worst things that can happen to a parent, but to lose a child and never know why they passed away must be agonising. Sadly, SUDC is an issue that hits many families across the UK—around 40 children are lost to it every year. At the start of this year, I met two constituents whose son passed away from sudden unexpected death in childhood in 2024.”
“One of my constituents suffered such coercive violence that her partner forced her to allow him back into the home. She could not tell anyone, and he continued to assault her daily. She reported the behaviour to the police, but they did very little. He is in prison for less than five years, and authorities are concerned that he will target her again when he is released. What is the Minister doing to ensure that women are properly protected against coercive violence, and that ex-partners face justice, so that we end this awful cycle of violence?”
“I have heard from so many businesses in Wokingham that have suffered post Brexit with masses of red tape limiting their exports. Losing key trade relationships in Europe has meant that many local businesses have seen their profits evaporate. What are the Government doing to develop and strengthen trade with Europe, so that businesses in Wokingham can start to grow again? Agreeing a bespoke customs union would be a really good start.”
“Duncan-Lynch Precision Engineering is a successful specialist manufacturing company established over 60 years ago. It would like to take on a number of new apprenticeships—good, well-paid jobs for local young people—but is struggling to find apprentices and appropriate courses. That is a clear concern for the business and for young people seeking good careers. Can we have a debate in Government time to discuss how to boost the uptake of apprenticeships and improve the courses available to manufacturing and engineering businesses?”
“On that point, I must highlight the vital work done by Vickie Robertson and her charity Kaleidoscopic UK, based in Wokingham, which helps women who have experienced domestic abuse across the Thames Valley. I have also seen through casework that so much of homelessness stems from domestic abuse, because a financial imbalance means women often have to care for their children, and the accommodation offered is unsuitable for families. The Government must take action to ensure that victims are not forced to return to perpetrators due to inadequate temporary accommodation. It is clear that although some progress to close the gender gap has been made, there is still so much more to do to make our communities safer for women and to level the playing field.”
“A very serious issue is when a lack of gender equality plays out in shocking and violent ways. Through casework, I have seen how many women in Wokingham are victims of abuse and violence, which is often linked to an imbalance in financial and physical power. It is a great shame that many women who are victims of domestic abuse feel unsupported and neglected by the police, the courts and other services, and are often left relying on charities. The Government must ensure that survivors of violence against women and girls are properly supported in the criminal justice system, with mandatory training for police and prosecutors on the impact of trauma. The Government must also ensure sustainable funding for services that support domestic abuse survivors.”
“The gender equality index is a helpful tool that looks at gender equality across all UK authorities. Wokingham scores in the top 10% of local authorities for women’s outcomes, meaning that women in Wokingham generally have better equality in pay, life expectancy, job progression and skills compared with women nationally. However, there is still a significant gap between women and men in pay, job progression and participation in civil society. That needs to change. It is, of course, very welcome that women are doing well in Wokingham, but that counts for little if their outcomes are still far behind those for men. That is why so much work still needs to be done to ensure that the gender balance is improved and strengthened for this generation and for many generations to come.”
“I congratulate the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) on her maiden speech. It was an eloquent speech that made us think that she has been here for several years. I really enjoyed her description of her constituency, and of the people and organisations she now represents. I hope that the hon. Member does not get involved in fixing the plumbing and the plastering in this place. Her place is in this Chamber, and I am sure that she will make a name for herself and be a really good champion for her constituents. This debate is an opportunity to mark the progress that we have made in improving gender equality and empowering women in all areas of life. It is important that we monitor that progress and assess where there is much work to do.”
“The Liberal Democrats would implement a 10-year capital investment programme that allows the NHS to plan for its future, not just its next budget cycle. That would include £10 billion to end the scandal of crumbling hospitals and GP practices, improving outcomes for patients and cutting daily costs for our national health service. We would establish a winter taskforce with a ringfenced £1.5 billion fund to deal with winter pressures, ending the cycle of raiding the capital budget just to cope with the latest predictable emergency. We have said on many occasions how that will be paid for. The question before the Minister today is not whether something needs to be done; we all know what needs to be done—investment on a huge scale—but the question is when. When will the Government deliver?”
“Like him, I was disappointed to see that the national cancer plan was not more ambitious in its investment in radiotherapy. Anyone who talks to him about this issue will hear about how outdated radiotherapy units are being pushed well beyond their life across the country. We must do better than that for our cancer patients. The national cancer plan, which I called for in this Chamber some 16 months ago, was a welcome step by the Government, but on radio- therapy investment—as with the new hospital programme —Labour has not met the moment. At this point, I pay tribute to the hon. Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton), who was the Minister who made the national cancer plan happen. I am sorry that she has decided that she needs to stand down from her post. She did a really good job.”
“Imaging is critical for the diagnosis of so many medical conditions. NHS England itself says that CT, MRI and X-ray machines need to be replaced every 10 years to be reliable, but 38 out of the 48 trusts that responded to the request for information reported having X-ray machines over that age in active use. Some 21 of them were using MRI machines that were more than 10 years old. Shrewsbury and Telford hospital NHS trust reported an X-ray machine that was 30 years old—older than some Members of this House. It should be a national scandal that lifesaving diagnoses are being left to equipment that we cannot safely rely on. Patients are at risk and staff pushed to breaking point. I would like to recognise the hard work of my hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) on radiotherapy.”
“In my constituency, we have seen thousands of new homes built in the last 10 years, but no new GP practice to serve those thousands of new residents, and I know that many Members will recognise that problem in their constituencies as well. The investment in facilities is just not keeping up with the reality on the ground. That is why I am fighting for a new GP practice at Arborfield Green, although the sad reality is that the lack of capital investment in this infrastructure and the incredibly complex commissioning rules stand in the way. I hope the Minister will have something to say about investing in primary care as well as hospitals. Let us not forget the outdated equipment currently in use in our NHS. Data uncovered by the Liberal Democrats has revealed that 80% of hospitals are using outdated X-ray, MRI or radiotherapy equipment.”
“Simply imagine that: your loved one critically unwell in resuscitation—your whole world turned upside down—and in that moment, you are hurried away from a stream of vile effluent. It is a national disgrace that this is the reality of our NHS today. That happened just this week. There is no new hospital coming for those patients, or for that consultant. The Government must today commit the money needed to maintain our entire hospital estate properly. Care, of course, starts in the community, before a patient ever reaches a hospital, but we all hear from our constituents that our primary care system is also not coping due to under-investment.”