Lee Barron
MP for Corby and East Northamptonshire · Labour · United Kingdom
“Just over 18 months ago, Harshita Brella was murdered in Corby and her body was found in the boot of a car. We are aware that there is an ongoing police investigation, and none of us wants to do anything to prejudice that, but her family feel isolated; recently, they flew over from India to get an update.”
“Q2. Max Hall is 14 years old. He should be worrying about school, football, friends and what he wants to be when he grows up. Instead, he is living with a high-grade brain tumour and there is no cure available to him.”
“As the Member of Parliament for Corby and East Northamptonshire, I agree with everybody about the emergency services, the NHS, the community who came together, the guards, the staff and the passengers as well, who did not go through the panic that can sometimes happen in situations like this.”
“Does the Secretary of State agree with me that train drivers, who connect our communities and deliver the goods we need, work in a safety-critical environment and deserve to feel safe? Does she also agree that the passengers and staff affected by the trauma of such an accident really do need our support and that of the rail operators?”
“I will use my time today to share the words of Jackie Hall, mum of 14-year-old Max Hall. She says: “Dear Members of Parliament, Max should be worrying about school, football, friends, and what he wants to be when he grows up.”
“Children with aggressive brain tumours cannot wait years for discussions, consultations, reports, and strategies. We need meaningful investment in brain tumour research. We need greater access to clinical trials. We need better awareness and earlier diagnosis. If this were your child, would you be satisfied with the options available?”
The complete record
Every one of 126 lines we hold for Lee Barron, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 3.
“Just over 18 months ago, Harshita Brella was murdered in Corby and her body was found in the boot of a car. We are aware that there is an ongoing police investigation, and none of us wants to do anything to prejudice that, but her family feel isolated; recently, they flew over from India to get an update. When they hear nothing, they feel as though nothing is happening, so will the Leader of the House work with Home Office and Foreign Office colleagues to ensure that the family receive monthly updates on what progress is being made in securing justice for Harshita?”
“Q2. Max Hall is 14 years old. He should be worrying about school, football, friends and what he wants to be when he grows up. Instead, he is living with a high-grade brain tumour and there is no cure available to him. His parents, Jackie and Steven, want to know why children being diagnosed with brain tumours are still being told that there are no treatment options available. Why does brain tumour research remain so underfunded, when brain tumours kill more children than adults under 40 than any other cancer? Why are families like them left to search for hope themselves? This Prime Minister has done so much to strengthen our NHS, so does he agree that we need to move at pace and do much more to offer hope to Max and his family, and families like his who are facing this unequally devastating disease?”
“Does the Secretary of State agree with me that train drivers, who connect our communities and deliver the goods we need, work in a safety-critical environment and deserve to feel safe? Does she also agree that the passengers and staff affected by the trauma of such an accident really do need our support and that of the rail operators?”
“As the Member of Parliament for Corby and East Northamptonshire, I agree with everybody about the emergency services, the NHS, the community who came together, the guards, the staff and the passengers as well, who did not go through the panic that can sometimes happen in situations like this. The 16.40 London train from Corby to was involved in this fatal collision. No worker should ever go to work never to return home, and I am sure all our thoughts are with the dedicated Shaun Burton, who lost his life, as well as with his family and his friends, and the family and friends of all those impacted and affected—a lot from my constituency —including those with injuries. I spoke to Ministers over the weekend, and I thank them for that. I have also spoken to the ASLEF and RMT unions, and I know that they are offering support.”
“In the name of Max, Jackie and their family, and for the sake of all the people who are suffering, now is the time for this Government to be the one who finally deliver.”
“Children with aggressive brain tumours cannot wait years for discussions, consultations, reports, and strategies. We need meaningful investment in brain tumour research. We need greater access to clinical trials. We need better awareness and earlier diagnosis. If this were your child, would you be satisfied with the options available? Please do not let another generation of children face the same future. Yours sincerely, Jackie Hall Mum to Max”. I will not stop until I get Jackie answers and get policies changed for young people like Max. Mandatory MRIs for long-term sufferers of headaches would be a good start, but after 12 years of warm words and broken promises, the motto of my constituency is deeds, not words.”
“I will use my time today to share the words of Jackie Hall, mum of 14-year-old Max Hall. She says: “Dear Members of Parliament, Max should be worrying about school, football, friends, and what he wants to be when he grows up. Instead, our family is living with the reality that he has a high-grade brain tumour and that there is no cure available to him. We have discovered that many of the treatments currently offered to children with aggressive brain tumours have changed very little over decades. What makes this even harder is knowing that before Max’s diagnosis, he suffered headaches for around a year. Max is funny. He is kind. He is intelligent. He is brave beyond words. He is a child who deserves the same urgency, investment, innovation, and hope that would be demanded for any child standing in front of you today.”
“I commend the Minister for coming to the House today to outline the various measures that have been taken, but what this says to me is that the model is fundamentally broken. We need a new model, one that puts people before profits, because people should no longer accept that the public always pay the bills and the shareholder always takes the profit. The issue with water is that we have privatised the profit and nationalised the debt. Bearing that in mind, does the Minister agree that the change people want is a Government who take the right and radical approach and bring our water back into public ownership so that it serves the people, and to stop shareholders being paid a dividend for failure on what is a natural monopoly and a basic human right?”
“That is what this Bill leads to, and that is what is going to happen as a result of it. British steelworking powered the first industrial revolution, and it can do so again, building the renewables and technology for the future. We still have a steelworks in Corby, and we want to make sure that Corby and the towns like it across our country have a new and secure future. I believe that the passing of this Bill will ensure that that happens.”
“That is why it is so important that British Steel should be allowed to continue. This Bill marks a reversal in direction. It shows what can happen when we have a vision for our economy and the dedication to see that vision through. How could the last Government shape our economy and create jobs when they failed to even create an industrial strategy? This Government have a strategy. Their decade-long industrial strategy, and the steel strategy announced in March, show that. The steel strategy provides £2.5 billion through the National Wealth Fund to help rebuild our steel sector so that we can move towards 50% of all British demand for steel being made in this country, ensuring our security in an unstable world with the capacity for our own virgin steel supply.”
“Corby is a town built on steel—steel that built this country. At one time, the Corby steelworks was the largest combined steelworks in Europe. I recognise that the Bill does not nationalise the steelworks in Corby, but it will make sure that the sector does well, and where that happens, that will ensure that the other aspects of steel do well. In 1967, it was the Labour party that nationalised the steelworks and put British Steel in charge. It did so because it knew that home-made steel was essential for our national security, for our economy and for thousands of jobs. In 1980, a Government who failed to see those opportunities closed the steelworks, and with that, tens of thousands of jobs went and almost a third of people in my constituency became unemployed.”
“I want to start off by saying that I find it absolutely incredible when people turn around and say that our Government should not be intervening and running services, when they are happy to allow other countries’ Governments to run our services and utilities. To be honest, I get a bit tired of it, because it is essential that we do this if we are going to save industries, save sectors and save jobs. That is why we are right in doing this. I want to speak on amendment 21, new clause 8 and new clause 5. It was a privilege to be recalled here on a Saturday last year to pass the emergency Steel Industry (Special Measures) Act 2025 to save the Scunthorpe works, and I am just as happy to be here today to see this Bill go through its first day of Committee. Since last year, it has become clear that public ownership is in the national interest.”
“Nobody should go to work, never to return home. On Tuesday 13 January 2026, Kenny Campbell Smart went to work at Corby steelworks and never returned home. Now that I have said his name, it will be written down and recorded in Hansard , and his name will live on forever. Today we are joined in the Gallery by Kenny’s wife Sally and his son Kian, who are determined that no other family should go through what they have been through. In the light of this, does the Leader of the House agree with them that we should do all we can to keep people safe at work, and that health and safety is not red tape, bureaucracy or a barrier to growth, but what keeps people safe at work? In the name of Kenny, his community, his workplace and his family, we should strengthen our laws so that this never happens again.”
“Quality of service in the Royal Mail has been at shocking levels over recent years. Considering that Royal Mail is legally obliged to deliver a universal service and keep our communities connected, will the Minister join me in calling on Royal Mail’s owners to honour their agreement, end the two-tier workforce, and bring new entrants’ terms and conditions up to the same standard as those of substantive Royal Mail employees? Fifty per cent of new entrants are leaving the service within a year, which is leading to a decimation in the quality of service.”
“Reform-led North Northamptonshire council has just announced that it is increasing school transport costs from £795 to £965 a year. That £170 increase—an increase of over 20%—is unaffordable for families. It comes from a council that promised lower costs for families, that failed to have its books signed off and that has received a groundbreaking real-terms increase in its settlement from this Government. Does the Leader of the House agree that North Northamptonshire council should reverse this unacceptable, uninformed and unaffordable decision?”
“Does the Minister agree that instead of Royal Mail imposing top-down changes by people who have never done the job before, it should listen to its workforce, sit down with the union and sort this mess out?”
“I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. It is not just the customers who are rightly angry; it is postal workers as well, because they take pride in their job and the service they give. The last time I was in Corby delivery office, six deliveries never went out that day. The time before that, a postal worker volunteered to cover his own delivery on his day off. He was told that he could not, and when he went back in the day after, the work was still there; the delivery had not gone out. We now have a two-tier workforce, which is leading to a recruitment and retention crisis, and it is a standing joke in the job that the quickest way to get a letter delivered is to put it inside a parcel.”
“Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull East mentioned. I believe that there should be some changes, and I believe that is the view of Members from across the House. I hope that the Government will work with colleagues across the House to produce a Bill that Members can feel comfortable supporting, that strengthens trust in our justice system, and that delivers justice for victims.”
“The constitutional right to trial exists for offences with a sentence of more than three years, but we need to look at that, because that was not what Leveson recommended. There are various other concerns that I have expressed, but let me say this to those who do not want any change at all: that position is not acceptable for victims, workers in the sector, or our constituents. Our system must deliver justice that is fair, timely and trusted. There are those who think that today is the end of the process. I have seen people saying, “This is D-day”, or “Today, MPs are going to scrap this, that and the other.” That is not the case. This is Second Reading. Once the Bill passes its Second Reading, as I think it will, we can start to look into the detail, and make the changes that my hon.”
“First, the amendment of the official Opposition talks about people’s right to elect which court they go to; if they are in a magistrates court, they can elect to go to Crown court. I was magistrate for 20 years and I never saw one person do that, because there are consequences: a judge in a Crown court has greater sentencing powers than a magistrates court. To those howling about this ability being taken away, I say this: in Scotland, defendants cannot elect what court they go to; the court decides that, so I do not see much wrong with that proposal. Concerns have been raised, both today and previously, about defendants causing delays. I did not really see much evidence of that, but I do not see a need to stand in the way of the changes being proposed.”
“Every time a victim waits months for justice, they are being failed, and trust is lost. Justice delayed is justice diminished. I thank the Minister for spending some time with me, to discuss this issue. I welcome many of the things that we spoke about, including bringing the number of magistrates back up to previous levels. To bring down the backlog, we might have to look at the number of court buildings that the last Government closed, because once a magistrates court is full, it is full. The courthouse in my constituency was closed, along with our police station. Kettering lost its courthouse, as did Daventry and Towcester. The reality is that justice no longer feels close to our people. I have some concerns, which I spoke to the Minister about, but let me come back on a couple of points.”
“This has been an incredible debate. I pay tribute to those who have felt able and courageous enough to share their personal circumstances with the House, and to the campaigners in the Public Gallery who have come along to hear a debate that will help make a success of their campaigns. I go back to what my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull East (Karl Turner) said: no Second Reading, no Bill. If we want to keep the good bits, we have to keep the Bill. If we want to change the bits that my hon. Friend mentioned, we have to give the Bill its Second Reading and get it into Committee. That is probably what we should do. I was a magistrate for 20 years. I stood down in 2023, when I was selected as the candidate for Corby and East Northamptonshire. The case for reforming our justice system has been made.”
“Either that has to stop, or those private companies can start paying towards the universal service obligation, so that we can protect services for people and make sure that all those accessing that service do so on the basis that they are paying towards it. Postal workers want to deliver the service that customers want. They want to serve their neighbours and their communities. But they can do that only with fair and honest discussion and with harmonised conditions, working together as one organisation, and with workers treated with dignity. That is how we are going to deliver and take Royal Mail into the future.”
“This is a service—a unique service. It keeps our communities connected, and it has a legal obligation, under the universal service obligation, to make sure that is done. Another problem is cherry-picking from the competition. Final-mile delivery is the most expensive part. Competitors will go in, pick up the bulk mail, spread it and sort it, and then give it back to Royal Mail and say, “You deliver it, because we can’t afford to do that—there ain’t no money in it.” In addition, they take parcels, give them to Royal Mail and say, “You deliver the final mile,” because they cannot afford to do that in rural areas.”
“They are missed hospital appointments, missed legal deadlines and missed chances to pay bills on time. Workers are telling me that they will have a scheduled day off during the week, say a Wednesday, but when they walk back into work on Thursday, all their Wednesday work is still there and they now have to deliver it with their Thursday work. They are then told, “You’re not getting any extra time to do it.” That leads to delay after delay, which is impacting our communities. I have had representations from Oundle, Thrapston, Raunds, Stanwick and Corby telling me about the problems that people are having. I have to say: the quickest way to get a letter delivered is to put it inside a parcel. That is the fact of the matter, because Royal Mail is prioritising parcels for delivery, which also has to stop. People deserve a service.”
“It is a pleasure to be part of this debate, Mr Stringer. I will begin by declaring my interest. I started at Royal Mail in 1986 on an apprenticeship. I have walked the rounds, sorted the frames and stood up for postal workers, prior to coming to Parliament, but I have never seen postal services in such a crisis as today. Some of that is structural, but apart from that, it is to do with the workforce. I have been to see them on many occasions and morale is down. They want to deliver the service that the customer demands, but they are being prevented due to cost-cutting exercises throughout Royal Mail. That is what needs to stop. Last week, nationally, Royal Mail delivered just 76% of first-class quality and 86% of second-class quality. Those are not abstract numbers, as has been said.”
“Back in 2004, I became a magistrate—a position that I held for 20 years. When I first walked into the magistrates’ retiring room, I thought everybody in there had retired, because I brought the average age down by about 30 years. That shows that the position is a commitment—people serve for years—and how hard it can be to get younger people involved. First, what is the Department doing to properly recognise and reward long-serving magistrates who keep the system going? Secondly, what is being done to bring in more young justices of the peace, so that magistrates better reflect the communities that they serve?”
“Work should be the route out of poverty, not into a lifetime trapped in it for children or their families. That is why this Government have chosen to back working families. That is why this Government have chosen to back children. That is why this Government are choosing fairness, and that is why Parliament should back this Bill.”
“This issue tells us everything we need to know about the priorities of the Opposition parties: they will fight for their cheaper mansions but not for children who go to bed hungry. And then there is Reform. Reform Members try to present themselves as the voice of working people, but when it comes to it, they vote against working families, they vote against employment rights, and they are voting against this Bill. Their amendment to the Bill says that they disagree with removing the two-child limit because it “fails to incentivise work” for low-paid families, but that is not people cheating the system or people taking advantage. That is working people kept in low pay by a system that the Conservatives built—a system that Reform now defends.”
“That is why I was proud when the Government announced this policy, which will lift 450,000 children out of poverty by the end of this Parliament. That includes over 3,000 children in Corby and East Northamptonshire. That is not just a statistic. It is 3,000 children; it is 3,000 lives; it is 3,000 futures and 3,000 chances. Members should not let anyone tell them that this is not about values, because it is. When we announced that we would put a tax on mansions, the Tories on the Opposition Benches were growling at us and telling us we could not do that, and now they are sitting there today telling us we should not be lifting 450,000 children out of poverty. This is all about values and where we stand.”
“First, I want to take us back, because this debate is being pitched as if those who are not in work are getting something that is being paid for by those in work—that ain’t the case, and it is wrong to suggest it. I will tell the House what the problem is: the scar of in-work poverty that was left on our economy. I came into politics to reduce child poverty. Children do not choose their circumstances. They are not to blame for low wages. They are not to blame for insecure work. They are not to blame for their parents’ pay packets, yet they are the ones who feel the consequences the most. A child’s chances should not depend on their parents’ wages. A child’s future should not depend on whether mum or dad has a bad boss or a bad year.”
“Q12. For too long, many of my constituents have not had access to good, secure, well-paid jobs. We made a commitment in our manifesto that we would change that. We cannot grow an economy based on insecure work where, from one week to the next, somebody does not know how many hours they will work or how much money they will be paid. Does the Prime Minister agree that all workers should have the hours that they actually work reflected in their contract so that we can give all working people the security to plan their finances and their lives and to build a future for themselves and their family?”
“I am proud to have secured a £20 million investment in the “pride of Corby” project—that is £2 million a year every year for the next 10 years—but it is crucial that local communities determine how and where the investment is spent. Does my hon. Friend agree that the money must be spent on exactly what the community actually wants, with residents properly consulted and local people as the decision makers?”
“Here is the problem: when planning permission was granted, people were given all sorts of promises about monitoring and limits. When what is on paper and what residents experience are so far removed from each other, we have to rethink what we are doing. We may need quarries to build the homes of the future, but companies have a duty to be good neighbours. Being a good neighbour is not about reports and assurances; it is about listening and doing the right thing. I will continue to seek those meetings to ensure that the residents of Laxton are heard. In the meantime, I suggest that those companies and those that run the site do the right thing by their people and their neighbours.”
“It is a pleasure to serve, Dr Murrison. Back in October, I went to Laxton and met with the parish council, a fine bunch of people. One of the main issues was the impact of the nearby Wakerley quarry. People turned up because it is affecting their homes and their lives. Residents told me about blasting, the noise, and cracks appearing in their houses. In older homes especially, people said their houses actually shake. I have met residents since that meeting; they have complained to Mick George, which runs the quarry, and to Burghley, which owns the site, but they feel ignored. Their complaints have not been dealt with. I am trying to get a meeting with Mick George and when I raised the issue with North Northamptonshire council, I was told that everything is being reported properly and no action is needed.”
“If someone is sick, they should not be dragged into poverty; if they work regular hours, they should get a proper contract; and if they are unfairly treated, there should be consequences. This Bill was promised and voted for at the election; this Bill should now pass.”
“There is no evidence to suggest that they have all of a sudden got out of control or gone absolutely mad —they have not, so we have been here before. We have lifted caps before to turn things around and send a clear message about what we want to build. On the proposal to cap the fine for denying access to trade unions at £75,000, what sort of a cap is that? What would that do to global giants? We saw what Amazon did to the GMB to frustrate its organising. Why should we allow big businesses to pay to break the law? Frankly, we should not. On guaranteed hours, there must be no loopholes and no cutting hours for a few weeks to dodge the law. We need a simple 12-week test, with a simple average of hours. That is fair, clear and enforceable. This Bill is about common sense at work.”
“I start by pointing out my proud membership of the Communication Workers Union, just so I can get that on the record. Before I get into the issues with the amendments, I want to say that enough is enough. Unelected Lords must not get in the way of the democratic will of the people and the manifesto commitment to deliver this Bill and make work pay. My constituents have waited long enough, worked long enough and put up with it for long enough. Every delay means someone going to work ill. Every delay means another zero-hours week. Every delay means that, once again, someone gets away with bad practice. The Lords amendments talk about a cap, but we have been here before. We have lifted caps before. Caps on compensation do not exist in cases of discrimination claims.”
“I welcome the Government’s review of the parental leave system, and I welcome the fact that all current and upcoming parental leave and pay entitlements will be in scope. No parent should be pushed into debt for having a baby. No mum should feel guilty for taking time to heal. No dad should be told that two weeks is enough. Natalie had the courage to speak up, but the petition proves that she is not alone. We are not asking for luxury. We are asking for fairness, dignity and the basic right to raise a child without being pushed into poverty.”
“I met Natalie from Raunds earlier this year, when she was seven months pregnant with her first child. She wants nothing more than to take time to care for her baby. When people are off work raising the next generation, the wages stop, but the rent and energy bills do not, and other costs go up. This is not just about Natalie. It is about warehouse workers, firefighters, nurses and shop staff—working people who pay in their whole lives but feel abandoned when they need support the most. We want a system that respects work, family and parenthood, and that means maternity and paternity pay being raised to at least the national living wage—proper, fully paid leave, as the Fire Brigades Union is fighting for in its Fight for 52 campaign. Parental leave is a day one right, not a privilege.”
“Q11. Twelve-year-old Millie Blair from Oundle joins us today in the Gallery along with her mum, Gemma, her sister, Jessica, and her dad, Gordon. On Millie’s 11th birthday, she was diagnosed with a rare bone cancer, which led to her leg being amputated. Millie attends Prince William school, but she cannot access the lower playing field because the slope is too steep. Her parents, the school and I have asked the East Midlands academy trust to put in a ramp, but it has refused, claiming that it is not subject to certain parts of the Equality Act 2010. Does the Prime Minister agree that the trust has an absolute moral obligation to make those adjustments to give Millie full access to all the school, so that she can play and thrive with all her friends?”
“I am looking forward to the full conclusion of the curriculum and assessment review, and I hope it is radical because tinkering at the edges will not do. We need an education system that lifts children up, not one that weighs them down, and one that measures potential, not pressure. It is time to build a system that helps every child to find their path, their purpose and, most importantly, their pride.”
“Too often, our system tells young people that they have failed—“How did you get on in that exam?”, “I failed”—but that is not the way we should be doing it. Children might struggle through SATs, GCSEs and endless English and maths resits, yet once they get to work they start to thrive. That is not their fault; that is the system we have built. Our system risks teachers teaching for the test not for the child, and the whole of year 6 gets wiped out because of SATs. I have heard children turning down opportunities for things like sport, or for time with their friends, because they say they need to study for their SATs. Clearly that is not right. Ten-year-olds should be outside playing, not losing sleep over league tables.”
“In Finland they do not assess at all until 16, but their children still learn and their teachers are still trusted. If we are to have primary school assessment, there must be much lower stakes. High stakes exams are not the only way to see what a child can do. We need to put trust back into our teaching professionals. They know their pupils best—they see them learn, grow and shine every single day. I welcome the Government’s ambition to move from half of young people going to university to two-thirds going on to either university or an apprenticeship. That is the right direction. Not all are good at exams. I went down the apprenticeship route, and I know first hand that there are many routes to success.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. Ours is a one-size-fits-all system, and it should not be, because one size does not fit all. That was certainly the message I took loud and clear from the SEND roundtable that I hosted in Corby and East Northamptonshire when we brought parents, schools and others together. SATs measure a school’s performance; they do not measure a child’s potential. The numbers speak for themselves: 56% of 10 and 11-year-olds say that SATs were the first time that they really worried about their abilities, 35% said that SATs made them feel ill, and 28% said that SATs made them feel bad about themselves. Let us be honest: exams are damaging young people’s mental health. We are one of the most over-assessed countries in the world.”
“My point is that it is not the schools and the way in which the schools are applying exams; the schools are doing what they can to protect the children. The problem is that the children know they are coming. The children feel the pressure point of the exams coming up. That is why they start to feel how they feel. The reason I can say that is that my daughter is 10, and she is the one who turned down going to the football because she has to revise for her SATs. Parents are trying to manage that situation. But that is the reality. They know it is coming. They feel the pressure point. It is not the school.”
“I thank the Chair of the Select Committee for the report—we agree with the recommendations that have been made. Does she agree that the Select Committee reached those recommendations by engaging with communities and local MPs, such as in Corby and East Northamptonshire, which brought together local SENCOs, parents and others to input directly into the Committee’s report? Will she thank them, as I do, and say well done to them for shaping that report and its outcomes? That is where it needs to come from—people who face these issues day in and day out making sure that this report belongs to them.”
“It is not good enough. Families are entitled to answers. If the local authority continues to refuse to be transparent and honest, and to answer the families’ questions, then I will lead their calls for a public inquiry. We have to end the defensiveness of our public bodies, either through their own integrity—as it should be—or by the Hillsborough law or, if needed, by public inquiry. Enough of the defensiveness. It is time for answers. We are determined to get them and the people of Corby deserve to hear them.”
“When I talk about baby loss, I cannot do so without raising the courage and determination of numerous families in Corby who continue to campaign and fight for answers: answers on rare childhood cancers, on multiple miscarriages and on those born with limb deficiencies. Toxic waste was dumped in Corby and we need answers. These families have questions that the local authority is not prepared to answer. In a response to the families’ solicitor, the council said, when it was asked where the toxic waste was dumped: “The Council understands its obligation of transparency…but considers the weight of public interest…falls in favour of non-disclosure.” Families are concerned that those with rare childhood cancers or multiple miscarriages are in certain places in Corby where whistleblowers have come forward to say that toxic waste was dumped.”
“Almost 15 years ago, my constituent Lauren Trevillyan lost her son Olly. She told me how the support just was not there—not for the families, not for the parents, not for the children. There is just not enough aftercare for people after such a loss, not physically and not mentally. To this day, Lauren is still waiting for a response to her request for counselling. Lauren struggled through those dark months, but now she is fighting for others. Lauren has been the driving force behind the baby loss awareness drop-in at Corby library over the past week, which is absolutely something we should all be behind. We need to talk about this openly and honestly. We have to break the taboo, because sadly it is far more common than people think. As has already been said, in this country 13 babies a day die close to birth.”