Parkinson’s Disease

16:31:00

I beg to move, That this House has considered care for Parkinson’s patients. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stuart. Like many colleagues across the House, I was proud to mark Parkinson’s Awareness Month last month. This annual observance is more than a symbolic gesture; it is a vital opportunity to raise awareness, challenge misconceptions, and advocate for the thousands of people across the UK who live with Parkinson’s every day. It is also a time to reflect on the progress we have made and, more importantly, the work that still lies ahead. Parkinson’s is a condition that touches every corner of our society. It affects over 150,000 people in the UK, and that number is expected to rise to 172,000 by 2030. In my constituency of Colne Valley, there are an estimated 253 people living with Parkinson’s. These are not just statistics; they are our neighbours, our friends and our family members, and behind each number is a story of resilience, of daily challenges and of hope. Parkinson’s is a progressive neurological condition. It is complex, degenerative and life-limiting. It affects movement, speech, cognition and mental health. There is no cure, and while treatments exist to manage symptoms, their effectiveness often diminishes over time. The condition manifests differently in each person: some may experience tremors and stiffness, while others struggle with depression—

Order. The sitting is suspended for 15 minutes for a Division in the House.

16:33:00

16:48:00

This variability makes Parkinson’s particularly challenging to diagnose, treat and manage. In West Yorkshire, the integrated care board is responsible for planning and delivering care for people with Parkinson’s. In 2023-24, spending on hospital admissions for Parkinson’s patients in our area rose by nearly 5%, with each admission costing more than £6,000. These figures underscore the urgent need for a more proactive, community-based approach to care—one that prevents hospitalisations and supports people to live well at home. Today I want to highlight five critical areas in which we must act to improve care for people living with Parkinson’s: workforce shortages, support from diagnosis, timely medication, prescription charges, and access to innovation. There is a severe shortage of neurologists and Parkinson’s specialists in the UK, and neurology services are meeting the 18-week referral target only about half of the time. The UK ranks near the bottom in Europe for the number of neurologists per capita. This shortage leads to delayed diagnoses, missed treatment windows, and a lack of access to essential multidisciplinary care. Only 44% of patients in England have access to an occupational therapist, 62% to a physiotherapist, and just 40% to a speech and language therapist. These professionals are not luxuries; they are essential to managing the condition and maintaining quality of life. Investing in this workforce is not only clinically necessary, but financially prudent.

One of my constituents is a strong advocate for the Parky charter. I understand that the Government cannot commit to everything that is in the charter, but does my hon. Friend agree that, at every fiscal event from now until the end of this Labour Government, they should seriously consider investing in these services and the professions that he talks about, or at the very least outline exactly what they are doing to provide support for people with neurological conditions?

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. That is crucial. We know the impact of Parkinson’s on individuals, and later I will mention two constituents I have been working with. I know the impact that it has on the community. Parkinson’s costs the UK £3 billion annually. Much of that is due to unplanned hospital admissions and the lost productivity of unpaid carers. Too many people with Parkinson’s feel abandoned after receiving their diagnosis. Nearly a quarter report not being given adequate information or access to support services. That is totally unacceptable.

I defer to the hon. Member’s great wisdom on this matter, and he helpfully outlined the points that he intends to cover, but I want to add another aspect to the debate. The Government’s review of disability benefits may lead to pressure on people in receipt of personal independence payments, and it is poorly understood that people receive those payments to provide for adjustments that allow them to continue to work. Does he agree that the Government have an opportunity to learn from the system in Scotland? Scotland’s adult disability payment is a much more humane process, and it could support people in receipt of personal independence payments who have Parkinson’s, which is a fluctuating condition and may be missed.

We have to keep an open mind, look at what is being done in other places, countries and regions, and learn from that. We should take that on board and relate any changes in the future to good practice elsewhere. I thank the hon. Gentleman for the intervention. A diagnosis of Parkinson’s is life-changing, and patients deserve immediate, comprehensive support. That is why Parkinson’s UK launched Parkinson’s Connect, which is a pioneering programme that enables healthcare professionals to refer newly diagnosed patients directly to a network of support. This includes access to specialist nurses, care advisers, local support groups and educational resources.

I want to look at things in a positive way for a moment. In my constituency, the local newspaper, the Ardrossan and Saltcoats Herald, highlights that the North Ayrshire table tennis club holds classes for people with Parkinson’s, and that the activity has been very well received. In 2024, a constituent of mine, Steve Morley from Stevenston, who took up table tennis to help with his symptoms after his Parkinson’s diagnosis, played at the World Masters in Rome. That is excellent. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is important to provide support for those with Parkinson’s who are keen to keep active?

I absolutely agree. This is not a case of placing people with Parkinson’s in the corner and providing them with medication; this is about helping them to lead full lives, improving their quality of life and aiding them to do what they want to do. I know from people I have met in the Parkinson’s community that that is exactly what they want to do, so I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. Early intervention can make a profound difference in how patients manage their condition and maintain their independence. For people with Parkinson’s, receiving medication on time—within 30 minutes of the prescribed schedule—is not a convenience; it is a necessity. Delays can lead to severe symptoms, including immobility, pain and, in extreme cases, life-threatening complications. However, more than half of hospitalised patients report problems receiving their medication on time.

A constituent of mine was diagnosed with Parkinson’s at the age of 61. Individual sufferers can experience the symptoms to varying degrees day by day, which brings into question the effectiveness of PIP assessments, the results of which can vary depending on when they are carried out. With medical assistance hard to come by, charities such as Parkinson’s UK and Cure Parkinson’s are vital to sufferers. Will the hon. Gentleman join me in thanking them and similar organisations for their support to these thousands of people across the country.

I absolutely agree—the role they play is vital in terms of supporting this community. To be truthful, the people I have met in those groups are inspirational, as is the work they do, so I thank them for that. NHS England’s medicine safety improvement programme, running from 2024 to 2027, is a welcome step. It aims to ensure that time-critical medications are administered promptly in hospitals, but we must ensure that the programme is fully implemented and that its findings are acted upon across all NHS trusts. Timely medication is a basic right for Parkinson’s patients, and we must treat it as such. In England, people with Parkinson’s still face prescription charges, unlike in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. These charges can be a significant burden, especially for working-age patients, who may already face reduced income due to their condition. Research shows that eliminating these charges could reduce hospital admissions and save the NHS money, but Parkinson’s remains absent from the list of conditions exempt from charges—a list that has not been meaningfully updated in more than 60 years. It is time for a review. We must ensure that no one is forced to choose between their health and their finances. New treatments such as Produodopa, which was approved for NHS use in 2024, offer hope for those with severe symptoms. This medication could be life-changing for patients whose symptoms are not well managed by the existing treatments. However, due to staffing and funding constraints, many hospitals are unable to offer it. We must ensure that all patients who need innovative treatments, such as Produodopa, can access them, and that the NHS is equipped to adopt new therapies quickly and equitably. Innovation must not be a postcode lottery. I will now turn briefly to my constituency. Since being elected, I have had the privilege of meeting Dr Chris Ryan and Mrs Liz Ryan MBE. Over a cup of tea in February, they shared their experiences and highlighted the urgent need for better Parkinson’s care in Kirklees. Liz, who received an MBE for her services to education, continues to be a pillar of our community despite her diagnosis. Together they have organised local events, including a Parkinson’s choir that brings joy and support to many. Following our meeting, I wrote to Kirklees council and Calderdale and Huddersfield NHS foundation trust to ask what more can be done. I also contacted the Department of Health and Social Care regarding regular consultations and better medication management, and the Minister informed me that the neurology service specification is being updated, and will be published later this year. Although remote consultations are helpful they are not always suitable for Parkinson’s patients, who require regular, holistic in-person care. I urge the Government to consult with Parkinson’s UK during this review. I also had the pleasure of attending the Big Sing for Parkinson’s on World Parkinson’s Day. The event was organised by the “Movers & Shakers” podcast, and it was a celebration of community, resilience and hope. As I said earlier, it was absolutely inspirational; to witness that community, and the strength of community spirit and determination to drive through with their lives, was incredible. The group also published the Parky charter, outlining five key needs for people with Parkinson’s—needs that are still unmet. This year, two Big Sings were held: the one I attended in Huddersfield, and the other in London. They brought together people in solidarity and song. As we move forward, let us remember that Parkinson’s Awareness Month is not just about raising awareness, but taking meaningful action. It is about listening to those with lived experience, supporting families and carers, and ensuring that our health system is equipped to meet the needs of every person living with Parkinson’s. Parkinson’s is a condition that demands our attention, compassion and action. By addressing workforce shortages, supporting patients from diagnosis, ensuring timely medication, removing financial barriers, and embracing innovation, we can dramatically improve the lives of those living with Parkinson’s.

We have five Back-Bench speakers. I will call the Front Benchers at 5.23 pm, so I will let hon. Members make a judgment on that. We will start with the ever-succinct and effective Ed Morello.

17:01:00

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart—especially after that flattery. I congratulate the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) on securing this important debate. Parkinson’s, as has been said, is the fastest growing neurological condition in the world. But behind every statistic is a family, a carer, a friend—someone whose daily life is shared by this illness. My constituents have written to me about their experiences of loved ones living with the disease. The stories they have shared are heart-breaking, with long waits for specialist care, difficulties accessing the right medication on time, and exhausting battles for financial and social support. I know I speak for many here when I say that we must do more. Parkinson’s is a progressive condition, with more than 40 possible symptoms affecting movement, sleep, mental health, speech, eating and swallowing. Nearly half of those living with it will experience anxiety or depression, and more than half will develop psychotic symptoms as the condition progresses. Across the country, there are long waits for specialist care, a lack of multidisciplinary teams with Parkinson’s experience, and serious difficulties in accessing vital medication in a timely and consistent way. We urgently need to overhaul the way that care is provided for people with Parkinson’s, particularly in rural areas. That begins with primary care. GPs are the front door to the NHS, yet we know that continuity of care is beginning to be eroded. That is why the Liberal Democrats are calling for everyone with a long-term condition such as Parkinson’s to have access to a named GP—someone who can understand their history and needs, and can advocate for timely referrals and co-ordinated care. This is not just about funding more; it is about funding smarter. Primary and community care can prevent some hospital admissions and provide medication and essential support for those who cannot easily travel. That is especially important in rural areas like mine, where distance, isolation and sparse public transport already pose significant barriers to treatment. Care services are struggling with conditions like Parkinson’s and have been stretched to breaking point by Government decisions and a lack of funding. Weldmar Hospicecare in West Dorset is a lifeline for so many families. Earlier this year, NHS Dorset announced a £400,000 cut to its fast-track funding, starting next April. Weldmar also faces a £600,000 increase in costs as a result of rising national insurance contributions and other pressures. It already raises 60% of its NHS-commissioned care through charitable donations, and that is unsustainable in the long term. The same goes for our community pharmacies, which are vital for people with Parkinson’s, especially in rural communities. They are not just dispensaries; they provide healthcare consultations, medical reviews and early advice, often acting as the first point of contact for worried patients. Yet the funding model they rely on is outdated and inadequate, leaving many rural pharmacies on the brink of collapse. If we are serious about reducing health inequalities, we must ringfence funding for essential services and not allow it to disappear into ever-wider budget allocations. We owe it to everyone living with Parkinson’s, and to the families, the carers and the health workers supporting them, to do better. That means listening to the voices of those people affected, ending the postcode lottery and making sure that no one, wherever they live, faces this devastating disease alone.

Admirably delivered.

17:05:00

It is a pleasure to serve under you in this debate, Mr Stuart, and I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) on securing this important debate. A family member of mine was diagnosed with Parkinson’s about two and a half to three years ago, so although I am not an expert on the issue, I understand how difficult it can be for family members, friends and the community. Unfortunately, my good friend from Yorkshire—my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley—has used up all my talking points, so I will keep my speech brief. Many colleagues have pointed out that 153,000 people in the UK have Parkinson’s, but the figure predicted for 2030 will rise to 172,000. That is a significant increase in five short years, so we must do more to support people and medical practitioners in terms of Parkinson’s. This point has also been made but, sadly, the Parkinson’s workforce in the NHS has been facing a shortage for over 30 years. It has been neglected and the Government should address that urgently. The Association of British Neurologists found that 1.1 full-time equivalent neurologists per 100,000 head of population were involved in patient care in the UK. If we compare that with France and Germany, the figure is one neurologist per—less than—25,000 head of population. The UK ranks 44th out of 45 European nations for the number of neurologists per head of population. That figure is simply not good enough. The Parkinson’s UK programme, Parkinson’s Connect, has been mentioned, and I urge the Government to roll it out across the NHS in England to make sure that more people with the condition get the support they need. This Labour Government have made a decision to freeze prescription charges for 2025-26. I really welcome that, but unfortunately, Parkinson’s is not on the list of medical conditions that are exempt from prescription charges. My understanding is that that list was decided in 1968 and has barely changed since. Independent research suggests that scrapping prescription charges in England for Parkinson’s would save the NHS £93 per person per year, and reduce A&E visits by approximately 9%. I call on the Government to scrap prescription charges for people with Parkinson’s. I will end on the blue badge scheme. Sadly, many people who suffer from Parkinson’s also suffer from a postcode lottery, where the local authority decides whether or not they will get a blue badge for their transport. A lot more research needs to be done on that. The Department for Transport and the Department of Health and Social Care should work together to ensure that people with Parkinson’s get the support that they need.

17:07:00

I thank the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for raising this issue. As Members are well aware, I have been a vocal opponent of the changes to PIP, and I will concentrate specifically on PIP issues, how they affect people with Parkinson’s, and why it is important that the Government are careful about what they do with the PIP benefit and money in relation to those who have this disease. When we consider the care that is needed for those who suffer from Parkinson’s, it is a perfect example of those who might well miss out on the care that they need the most. The hon. Gentleman set the scene well in relation to the problems that come with Parkinson’s, and others who have spoken also referred to them. We can all rightly understand how the personal independence payment costs may overstretch local authorities and providers—the NHS on the mainland and our underfunded trusts in Northern Ireland. The entire purpose of PIP, of course, is not to compensate for the illness in some way; it is to help someone live with the practicalities of the illness. That is the purpose of PIP and why I support it. I am really concerned about what might happen. PIP is not a supplement to keep people off work. It can help people in work, which is part of what the Government say the purpose is. PIP exists to help offset the cost of being sick or disabled and, as such, is an effective health intervention. A recent freedom of information request, however, found that 36% of people with neurological disorders were at very high risk of losing out on PIP. That could be even higher for people with Parkinson’s, as even if someone has scored four points previously in a “daily living” category, the rapidly fluctuating nature of the condition means that it is not guaranteed that that will be scored again. We need to understand what Parkinson’s is, what it delivers and the importance of it. Without the financial support needed to help with the additional costs of sickness and disability, and with many households losing passported carer’s allowance, unmet need will likely transfer to local authorities, as part of their statutory obligations. I am concerned about the scenario the Government could find themselves in if they remove or reduce personal independence payments, and take away the carer’s allowance. The leader of the Liberal Democrats, the right hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), said during Prime Minister’s questions today that a family could lose £12,000 a year; other calculations that indicate it could be £10,000 a year. The financial impact will be ginormous.

I am glad that the hon. Member has brought this point up. Hon. Members have mentioned that there are 153,000 sufferers in the UK, 10% of whom rely on PIP. It is vital for them to live and work independently. I share the hon. Member’s concern that any reduction in sufferers’ access to PIP will not only have serious financial consequences but lead to a diminishment of their independence.

That sums up the thrust of my comments. I am really concerned by what the Government are pursuing and the impacts that it will have. This is coming from the people on the frontline—I would call them the people on the coal quay—who understand exactly what it means. Equally, if people with Parkinson’s are no longer able to afford the extra heating needed to help with their debilitating muscle spasms, they are more likely to have a fall. That will increase hospital admissions and stays, as well as social care support for fractures and joint replacements that could have been prevented by making sure that people retain their moneys and do not see corners cut in their care. It is not just individual health outcomes that will be affected. With a quarter of councils in England saying that they are on the brink of bankruptcy and other providers across the UK being stretched, this policy could have devastating impacts on local services. I will conclude with this point, because I want to keep to time, Chair. When we think about care for Parkinson’s patients, we must think of the effect of removing PIP from those people. I know that it is not the Minister’s responsibility, but I ask that he convey the concern that has been expressed in the debate to the relevant Minister in DWP and fight the fight to ensure that these people have the care that they need in the most cost-effective way possible.

17:12:00

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stuart, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for securing this important debate. Over the last few years, too many patients living with Parkinson’s disease have sadly been left facing unacceptable waits to be diagnosed and treated; they then face further challenges accessing the medication they need. That has ripple effects across our communities—it certainly does in my communities in South Dorset—as the neurological condition impacts not just the person with the diagnosis but their family and loved ones. Many Members will be very aware from their inboxes that thousands of patients in England—far too many—are on a waiting list for neurological services, and around half are left waiting for more than the NHS target of 18 weeks. That means that the illnesses of many patients may have gone undiagnosed, with their conditions worsening as they wait to be seen by the necessary specialist doctor. Patients living in coastal communities, including in South Dorset, often encounter specific challenges when accessing healthcare, and they also face higher incidences of long-term conditions such as Parkinson’s. Too often, patients in my community are confronted with a long wait for an appointment with a specialist and a long journey to the nearest major hospital. That problem is compounded by a national shortage of Parkinson’s specialists. More than 20 constituents have written to me to raise this worrying state of affairs. Parkinson’s is the fastest growing neurological condition in the world, and we must do more to support those whose lives have been changed by the disease. I join my constituents in South Dorset and charities such as Parkinson’s UK in their support for the Parky charter. It sets out five principles to improve care for everyone with a Parkinson’s diagnosis. The Home Secretary has rightly pledged to support those principles, which include delivering referrals in under 18 weeks; providing comprehensive information; giving automatic access to free prescriptions; comprehensive care; and increasing funding for research into the condition. On that last point, Parkinson’s is deemed incurable, but it does not have to stay that way. Treatment options are very limited in this country. More funding could certainly enable the development of innovative, life-changing treatments, or even a cure in the longer term. Progress has already been made on the five points in the Parky charter. This Labour Government have already begun clearing the NHS backlog, with waiting lists down by some 219,000 since July, and I believe that their elective reform plan will mean more neurological appointments every year. By providing extra appointments, scans and operations, in particular at evenings and weekends, the Government can clear the backlog so that everyone is seen within the critical NHS target of 18 weeks. More broadly, I hope that the Government’s 10-year plan for our NHS will radically reform how people with long-term conditions such as Parkinson’s disease are treated through the NHS. The Health Secretary’s action to clear the backlog, the 10-year plan and the elective reform plan have begun to improve care for those with Parkinson’s disease, but we can and must go so much further. I hope that today’s debate will galvanise support across the House for the vital mission of ensuring timely diagnosis, comprehensive care and dignity for all people living with Parkinson’s. My constituents and their loved ones and families deserve nothing less.

17:16:00

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stuart. I thank the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for securing the debate. It is interesting that three of the five Back Benchers who have spoken in it are from Dorset. I do not know what that says about our population, but there we go.

I will answer that with one of my favourite facts about Dorset: if we were a country, we would be the oldest in the world by population age. We are older than Japan.

My hon. Friend and constituency neighbour is correct. We have the Jurassic coast, but we are also the oldest county. My daughter is currently undertaking a PhD in the causes of Parkinson’s, and I should also declare that I am a member of the all-party parliamentary group on Parkinson’s. Although life expectancy for those living with Parkinson’s is much improved, their quality of life is deeply impacted. They are incredibly vulnerable to falls and infections, limiting their ability to work. The recent changes to PIP are causing deep distress to the community. I look forward to hearing how the Government will recognise the needs of those with fluctuating neurological conditions in assessments. However, I want to focus on the issues of treatment and care for patients. There are 216 people currently registered as living with Parkinson’s in my constituency. I have been told that there is virtually no service of specialist nurses or active phone line support in my community. That leaves vulnerable people isolated and at higher risk of traumatic, expensive and often unnecessary hospital admissions. The Minister will be aware that an absolute diagnosis of Parkinson’s is possible only post-mortem—I pay tribute to the work of the brain bank at Imperial and that of the similar motor neurone disease brain bank at King’s College London. We therefore rely on specialists to focus on the symptoms in order to make a diagnosis, but there is a significant problem, which was explained to me this week by a GP at Walford Mill surgery in Wimborne when I spent the morning shadowing him. He told me that wait times for diagnosis for Parkinson’s can be more than six months, so experienced GPs who are able to prescribe medications have a dilemma. They can help their patients by prescribing medications to reduce the symptoms, but in doing so they make it more difficult for the specialists to diagnose the condition. If the referral-to-treatment times were dramatically improved, GPs could ask people to wait, but with the current delays, it seems cruel to ask both those living with symptoms and their family doctor to do that. That takes me to my next point: the lack of neurologists. The UK is 44th out of 45 countries in Europe for number of neurologists per head of population, and the waiting list for neurological conditions stands at a staggering 232,994 people. According to Alzheimer’s Research, neurological conditions are the leading cause of global ill health, with 3.4 billion people suffering from one, which makes it seem even crazier that we have this problem. It is not only that: Parkinson’s, along with other neuro conditions such as functional neurological disorder and achalasia, which I have raised previously, require multidisciplinary teams to look after patients, and local NHS systems just are not set up to do that properly. Will the Minister ensure that the NHS 10-year plan will deliver ways of working that will support those with such conditions? Finally, I will touch on prescription charges. I know the issue has been raised before, but the list of conditions for free medication has not changed since 1968. It is shocking that Parkinson’s is not one of those conditions. My constituent, Carole, who was diagnosed aged just 46, is finding that really tough and believes, as I do, that a full review of these conditions for working-age people should be undertaken now. The final word must go to two of my constituents. Malcolm, from Wimborne, said: “I have suffered from Parkinson’s for 10 years. It has changed my life completely for the worse. I cannot speak, I have frequent falls, we need better support.” Danielle, also from Wimborne, who was diagnosed at 38, said: “This is becoming more common with younger people…The impact of this disease on my life is immeasurable. It is more than a struggle. It is a fight every day. We need these issues addressed urgently to reduce the burden.” I hope that the Minister will be able to offer us some comfort.

17:20:00

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stuart. I thank the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for securing today’s debate. As hon. Members in the Chamber have noted, Parkinson’s does not just affect movement; it affects every part of life. It disrupts eating, swallowing, sleeping, mental wellbeing and independence. Although more than 40 symptoms are recognised, each person’s experience is different—as unique as their fingerprint. I want to focus a little on one group today: the experience of women with Parkinson’s is often more complex, more misunderstood and more neglected. That was brought to my attention by a constituent of mine in Mid Sussex, whose mother was diagnosed six years ago; it took her mother five years to get an accurate diagnosis. Women are more likely to be misdiagnosed, and more likely to be underdiagnosed. They are more likely to experience delays in treatment and to have their symptoms dismissed or attributed to anxiety or the menopause. Some research even suggests that women’s Parkinson’s symptoms may fluctuate more dramatically due to hormonal cycles, but we do not yet fully understand that because, historically, as in so many other contexts, women have been under-represented in clinical trials. Women with Parkinson’s are also more likely to carry the invisible burdens of being carers themselves, all the while struggling with a progressive neurological disease. We need gender-specific research, treatment strategies and clinical training. We need health professionals who understand that Parkinson’s in women is a critical gap in care that we must close. When I submitted a written parliamentary question about that recently, the response revealed that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has no specific guidelines for Parkinson’s that reflect those gender differences. We need, as a society, to realise how differently the disease can present in and affect women. Across the board, people with Parkinson’s face long waits for specialist care, delays in diagnosis and difficulty in accessing essential treatments. I recently talked to Richard, a constituent of mine in Mid Sussex who has Parkinson’s. He spoke of the profound difference that such treatments can make; he told me that they make life-changing differences to him. Yet for too many they are inaccessible due to postcode lotteries, which hon. Members have mentioned, and a lack of trained staff. What is perhaps worse is that some patients in hospitals are not even receiving their medication on time. For people with Parkinson’s, that delay can mean the difference between mobility and being bedbound, between clarity and confusion, and between dignity and indignity. We have to do better. We must also talk about mental health. Nearly half of all people with Parkinson’s experience anxiety and depression. As the disease progresses, up to 60% develop psychotic symptoms, and they are up to six times more likely to develop dementia. Those are staggering figures. What needs to change? We Liberal Democrats are calling for urgent reform, starting with a full review of the medicine supply chain, to ensure that no person has to live in fear of running out of vital medication. We want a faster approval process for new treatments through an expansion of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency’s capacity—not slashing it, as the Government have done by cutting 40% of its workforce. Every person with Parkinson’s or other long-term conditions needs access to a named GP, because continuity of care should not be a luxury. We also need to restore the importance of mental health in NHS planning. The Government’s decision to let the share of NHS funding going to mental health to fall and to scrap targets for dementia and mental health was wrong and totally short-sighted. We also know that family carers are at breaking point. I thank the hon. Members for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East (Seamus Logan) and for Strangford (Jim Shannon), as well as my hon. Friend the Member for Tewkesbury (Cameron Thomas), for raising the issue of the personal independence payment. According to the Government’s own assessment, 150,000 family carers are going to be impacted by 2029-30 as a result of the proposals on PIP, and that is on top of the 800,000 people losing PIP. Has the Minister pressed his colleagues in the Department for Work and Pensions on that point when it comes to conditions such as Parkinson’s? People with Parkinson’s should be supported not only to live, but to live with independence and dignity. Parkinson’s is cruel: it steals movement, independence and, far too often, hope. But we can fight back with the right policies, the right funding and the right political will. We can make a difference. Let us listen to the voices of people living with Parkinson’s—including women, whose voices and needs have been overlooked for far too long.

17:25:00

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stuart. I thank the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for his role in securing this vital debate and all Members who contributed. As we have heard today, Parkinson’s affects 153,000 people in the UK; more shockingly, every hour, two more people are diagnosed. For me, the issue is personal: a close family member was initially diagnosed and treated for Parkinson’s, but more recently that diagnosis was revised to progressive supranuclear palsy—a rarer and more aggressive condition. That journey from uncertainty to diagnosis and then to living with a progressive neurological condition has profoundly impacted me. I have witnessed first hand the critical importance of early diagnosis, emotional support, specialist care and—above all—hope. Last month, ahead of World Parkinson’s Day, I met representatives of Parkinson’s UK and individuals affected by the condition. I heard powerful accounts from volunteers about the daily challenges that they face with mobility issues, speech difficulties and the emotional toll on themselves and their families. I will continue to commend Parkinson’s UK for its tireless work, both across my constituency of Farnham and Bordon, including Haslemere, Liphook and the surrounding villages, and across the country, providing advice, support and advocacy at every stage of the Parkinson’s journey. However, I have been concerned that the Labour Government have yet to identify Parkinson’s as a strategic priority. Will the Minister confirm what level of funding is being allocated to Parkinson’s research this year? How does that compare with the past five years? During my tenure at the NHS Getting It Right First Time programme, I was involved in the publication of the neurology national specialty report. That analysis highlighted significant variation in neurological services across England, particularly in managing conditions such as Parkinson’s disease. The recommendations are essential for reducing disparities and improving outcomes, so will the Minister commit to addressing in detail the priorities in the report, beyond general references to cutting waiting lists? The previous, Conservative Government invested more than £79 million into research into Parkinson’s between 2019 and 2024; in 2022-23, the National Institute for Health and Care Research enabled 114 studies related to Parkinson’s through its infrastructure. We also rolled out a new treatment for advanced Parkinson’s disease through the NHS, which started in February last year, offering an additional option for patients whose symptoms were no longer responding to oral medication. I would be grateful if the Minister could confirm that the Government plan to continue that momentum. What research funding will be maintained or increased and what new treatment options are being supported or explored? The new Government have committed to updating the last Conservative Government’s long-term workforce plan. When will they announce the detail and what specialist training there will be for Parkinson’s nurses and clinicians? Will they maintain the focus on specialist care? Charities such as Parkinson’s UK do an amazing job, but as with many other sectors they are having to respond to higher taxes and squeezed funding. Will the Minister outline how he is talking to the charitable sector to ensure that the changes that the Government are making in the Budget are not damaging Parkinson’s care? Finally, what guarantees can the Minister offer that the recent restructuring of NHS England will not worsen access to Parkinson’s services? With 50% cuts to integrated care boards, can the Minister reassure people that Parkinson’s sufferers and their families will not be disadvantaged? Members from across the House are united in wanting to improve treatment, support and outcomes for people with Parkinson’s. In response to a debate I spoke in earlier this month, the Public Health Minister said that she would be happy to meet with stakeholder organisations to discuss the Parky charter and the progress of Parkinson’s Connect pilots. I would be grateful if the Minister could outline whether the Public Health Minister has arranged those meetings and, if she has not, when they might happen. A meeting would prove the Government’s action on workforce, waiting times, integration, support for carers, and access to research and innovation. My colleagues in the Conservative party and I stand ready to work constructively with the Government, and with Members from all parties, to ensure that progress is not only protected but accelerated. Let us match awareness with action, for only with action will there be hope.

17:30:00

It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for securing this important debate. He spoke with real passion and conviction, as did hon. Members from across the Chamber. I do not know whether we have a full house from Dorset, but we have the hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello), my hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset (Lloyd Hatton) and the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade); it was great to hear their thoughts. We also heard from the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), who spoke, as always, with great passion and conviction. This debate follows closely on the heels of the Backbench Business debate on Parkinson’s Awareness Month, which was led by my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline and Dollar (Graeme Downie). I thank the Members who have spoken in both debates. I pay tribute to the invaluable work of NHS clinicians, charities and care workers who spend every single day improving the lives of people with Parkinson’s disease. I am particularly encouraged by the Parky charter, which is raising public and professional awareness about the needs of the Parkinson’s community and the importance of timely diagnosis, comprehensive care and dignity for all people with Parkinson’s. Organisations that fight for patients, such as Parkinson’s UK, are at the heart of our policies for the NHS, which is broken but not beaten. We look forward to working with them to fix the foundations of the NHS and to make it work for people with Parkinson’s in Colne Valley, throughout Yorkshire and across the country. Parkinson’s disease can severely impact every aspect of a person’s daily life, as well as the lives of their family and unpaid carers. It can put people under immense strain, and they deserve additional support to help them live with the condition. Around 153,000 people live with Parkinson’s in the UK, and it is the fastest growing neurological condition in the world. About 16.5 million people in the UK, or one in six of the population, have a neurological condition, and 600,000 people are diagnosed with one each year. Together, neurological conditions cause around 140,000 deaths every year in the UK—one fifth of all deaths—and they are the leading cause of disability. In 2019, the NHS spent just under £4.5 billion on neurological conditions and they cost the UK economy £96 billion, so tackling them presents a real opportunity not just for the Government’s health mission but for our growth mission. We must face the fact that patients are facing significant challenges, including not enough people in the places we need them, and delays to treatment and care, with long waiting times. We also listen to patients who tell us that they have experienced a lack of information and support. We are acting to address those challenges, starting with our workforce. Parkinson’s nurses and neurologists are worth their weight in gold, and they are key to meeting patient demand. This summer, we will publish a refreshed long-term workforce plan, as a first step towards rebuilding our workforce over the next decade and treating patients on time again. We will ensure that the NHS has the right people, in the right places, with the right skills, to deliver the care that patients need when they need it. We will set out in black and white the numbers of doctors, nurses and other professionals who will be needed in five, 10 and 15 years’ time. Turning to waiting lists, the NHS constitution sets out that patients should start consultant-led treatment within a maximum of 18 weeks from referral for non-urgent conditions. At the start of the year, my right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister announced our elective reform plan, which sets out our approach to hitting that target by the end of this Parliament. We have already surpassed our manifesto pledge to deliver an extra 2 million elective appointments, seven months ahead of the deadline; we are now on 3 million appointments and counting. Many of those were appointments for treating Parkinson’s. I know that there may be some people with Parkinson’s watching the debate at home and shouting at their telly, “Well, I am still waiting for treatment.” Although waiting lists are coming down, and recently fell for six months in a row, they are still high. I completely understand why people who are still waiting feel frustrated. I say to them: we are throwing the proverbial kitchen sink at waiting lists, and we will not stop until you see and feel the results. The NHS has begun some important initiatives to improve its neurology services, including the neuroscience transformation programme, the Getting it Right First Time initiative, a strengthened clinical reference group and the appointment of a national clinical director for neurology. The NHS is focusing on improving patient experiences, addressing the disparities in care and ensuring that patients are given their medicines on time. The neuroscience transformation programme is focusing on faster diagnoses, better co-ordinated care and improved access to specialist services. At the at the recent Backbench Business debate—and, of course, in this debate—a number of hon. Members spoke about personal independence payment as an important way of helping people to cope with the extra living costs of a disability or health condition. I am sure all Members would agree that those who can work should work. However, I am happy to reassure colleagues that our “Pathways to Work” Green Paper will make sure that people with the most severe lifelong health conditions who cannot work will see their incomes protected. We are consulting on the Green Paper to hear how best we can support those impacted by our reforms. We continue to encourage research, which is advancing our understanding of Parkinson’s at breakneck speed, through targeted funding, infrastructure support and collaboration. For example, the UK Dementia Research Institute, sponsored by this Government, is partnering with Parkinson’s UK to establish a new £10 million research centre. The NIHR is supporting research that has discovered that eye scans can detect Parkinson’s disease up to seven years before symptoms appear, which helps people to receive treatment earlier and prepare themselves as best they can. Research also underpins the entire drug discovery and development process. Produodopa is a groundbreaking new treatment for Parkinson’s disease, particularly for patients with advanced disease and severe motor fluctuations. It is revolutionary because it provides a continuous 24-hour infusion of medication via a small pump, allowing more consistent symptom control. The NHS rolled it out in February last year. It has been shown to improve motor function and has proved its worth by significantly improving the quality of life for people with advanced Parkinson’s. At the debate on 1 May, many Members emphasised the importance of staying active. Indeed, there is strong scientific evidence that being physically active can help people to lead a healthier and happier life. For example, exercise can reduce the risk of major illnesses and lowers the risk of early death by up to a third. Our social prescribing programme is a key component of the NHS’s universal personalised care and a way for GPs or local agencies to refer people to a social prescribing link worker. Those workers give people time, focusing on what matters to them and taking a holistic approach to people’s health and wellbeing. They connect people to community groups and statutory services for practical and emotional support. Looking forward, we have committed to publishing a 10-year plan for health to shift the focus of our NHS from hospital to community, from analogue to digital and from treatment to prevention. In the meantime, we have taken steps towards those shifts through the home-based care pathway, which is providing comprehensive support and care for people with Parkinson’s in their own home, and through the NIHR project to test a non-invasive vibrational cueing system, helping people with Parkinson’s to maintain their walking as they go about their everyday lives.

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) on securing the debate. I declare an interest as a member of the APPG on Parkinson’s, as the son of a sufferer of Parkinson’s, and as the grandson of someone who died suffering of Parkinson’s. We all agree that, while there are real challenges, we must secure a cure for Parkinson’s. Does the Minister agree that we owe a great debt of gratitude to the partners, spouses and community groups that do so much to support people suffering from Parkinson’s as they go through not only horrific mobility loss but the associated deep psychiatric problems?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right; our system could not survive without the amazing and heroic work of our unpaid carers. One of our Government’s actions that I am most proud of is the change to the carer’s allowance. We increased the number of hours for which a carer can work and still keep their carer’s allowance by raising the threshold from £151 to £196. I hope that is giving carers the flexibility that they need. Many carers want to work but it is immensely stressful for them to balance their working and caring responsibilities. I was very pleased that we could announce that change back in January, but my hon. Friend is absolutely right that there is a lot more that we can do. I am working with colleagues in DWP and the Department for Business and Trade to look at how we can do more as a Government for unpaid carers. My hon. Friend is absolutely right to pay tribute to them; they are the lifeblood of our care system. The consultation on our 10-year plan received over 190,000 responses, giving people with Parkinson’s and other conditions a voice in the future of healthcare. I want to conclude this debate by quoting just one of those voices—that of Winston, a former St John Ambulance worker from Lewisham. He said: “People don’t always see what’s happening to me, or what Parkinson’s looks like on me. They don’t see me early in the morning. They see me looking nice and managing the condition as best I can. But I have to deal with my own bubble sometimes, and it gets burst, and things go all over the place.” I am pleased that Winston is doing fantastically well and now sharing tips with people on how to improve their public speaking abilities. His words will resonate with anyone who has a long-term condition. Stories like his should remind us why we need a health service that sees the whole person, not just the condition, to give patients the dignity, care and respect that they deserve. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley again for securing this important debate, and I pay tribute to all Members for making it constructive and powerful. I look forward to working with Members on this matter.

17:43:00

I thank all Members for their really thoughtful and powerful contributions; we heard a powerful consensus across the Chamber. We have heard from the Minister about the Government’s focus on making a difference. Clearly, the Parkinson’s community want to see change, and they want to see it as soon as possible. It is up to us to ensure that that happens, and I am sure that the Members in the Chamber will continue to do that. I pay tribute to the groups supporting our Parkinson’s sufferers, and to those individuals themselves. I said this earlier, but it is hugely inspiring to talk to people in the Parkinson’s community. Their strength is remarkable. We need to repay that with change as soon as possible to help them live their lives to the full, and find a cure for this terrible condition. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered care for Parkinson’s patients.

17:45:00