Brain Cancer

[Paula Barker in the Chair]

[Relevant documents: First Report of the Petitions Committee of Session 2015–16, Funding for research into brain tumours, HC 554, and the Government response, Session 2016-17, HC 292; and Oral evidence taken before the Petitions Committee on 27 May 2021, on Brain tumour and childhood cancer research, Session 2021-22, HC 242.]

I beg to move, That this House has considered e petition 738881 relating to brain cancer research and treatment.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Barker. I thank Sarah Bainbridge and the rest of Brain Cancer Justice for creating the petition that has led to this debate. Although it was established only last year, it has already built a remarkable campaign and secured support from more than 109,000 people for the petition—well done and thanks very much. The petition calls for increased funding to accelerate discoveries and clinical trials, improved access to whole genome sequencing with personalised treatment and the protection of the right of patients to try innovative treatment options.

It is not the first time that Parliament has debated this issue. Just over a decade ago, a petition calling for greater funding for brain tumour research received more than 120,000 signatures, which led to a Petitions Committee inquiry report.

I am very glad that my hon. Friend has brought this debate to us. The petition to which he refers was in memory of the son of my constituent; his name was Stephen Realf, and sadly he died in 2014. The petition calls for increased funding to reach parity with the funding for leukaemia and breast cancer. Stephen’s father Peter is in the Chamber today. Would my hon. Friend care to comment on the importance of the work done by Stephen Realf’s sister Maria back then in raising the profile of this vital issue?

I absolutely agree. I have spoken to Peter, and it was remarkable what they did then. The inquiry—there have not been many petition inquiries—was a result of the work they did, and it has certainly made sure that the subject has not gone away. That petition recognised that brain tumour patients have been failed “at every stage” of the research and funding process. As a result of that and the inquiry, some progress followed: a task and finish working group was established, and in 2018 the Government pledged £40 million for brain tumour research. However, by 2024 only £15 million of it had been delivered. Many further petitions have been brought forward by campaigners, but meaningful progress continues to stall.

I thank my hon. Friend for the moving way in which he is opening today’s debate. It has been really heartbreaking to hear from my constituent Hayley about the battles that her granddaughter Lily has had to go through to try to find effective treatments for her brain tumour. The Brain Tumour Charity has highlighted that fewer than 40% of patients with brain tumours are informed about clinical trials. Does my hon. Friend agree with its recommendation that the Government need to reflect on how every eligible patient can be informed about, and ideally have access to, clinical trials to ensure that the widest possible range of treatment options is available?

Absolutely. That is a key element of the work that needs to be done to help patients with this issue. I will refer to that later, but it is fundamental. We know that, without that research, nothing will improve and we will continue to see the terrible conditions and quality of life that people have to face.

On the brain tumour research consortium, I understand that none of the moneys to which the hon. Gentleman refers have made it to Northern Ireland’s research facilities. Does he share my concern about the need to ensure that the money reaches the whole United Kingdom to benefit our collective research, including at Queen’s University Belfast, and find a cure for everyone in this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?

I was not aware of that, but clearly it is unacceptable and makes no sense whatever. We really need to use our experience right across this nation. I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman.

It is a fact that in the UK brain tumours remain the biggest cancer killer of children and of adults under the age of 40. Approximately 13,000 people are diagnosed each year. For those who are diagnosed with a high grade brain tumour, the five year survival rate remains just 12.9%.

My constituent Emma has long been committed to achieving justice for people with brain cancer and has been writing to me about it ever since I became an MP. She has highlighted the survival rate of 12.9%. As we have already heard, research funding in this area is very low, at just 1% to 2% of overall cancer research funding. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need to increase the research funding to improve that five year survival rate?

Absolutely. I use the word again: it is fundamental. Without it, there is no real way forward. We will continue to repeat the same treatments that we have seen for many years. Those treatments are not fully effective, as we know, so we need research to develop new and innovative approaches.

I have referred to some statistics, but we have to remember that behind every statistic is a family. Each family are pursuing every available treatment, and all too often they are turning to crowdfunding to travel overseas in search of a cure, because significant barriers continue to block progress here at home.

Workforce shortages also limit access to care. Only 40% of patients have a clinical nurse specialist, and there is a 30% shortfall in consultant radiologists. Early career researchers lack funding and support, which pushes talent away from this field. That is especially damaging because scientists from diverse disciplines are essential for the development of new treatments.

System failures also prevent the limited available funding from reaching patients in a meaningful way. Whole genome sequencing is not routinely available at diagnosis, and access to a clinical trial remains severely restricted.

The Mount Vernon hospital in my constituency has a cancer centre, both for trials and for treatment. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that one of the key asks that we all have of Government is to improve the international join up so that the people doing this research can tap into the expertise of the clinicians treating patients in other countries, who in turn can learn from the expertise in the UK? Too often, because these tumours are very rare, identifying effective treatments and effective numbers for trials can be difficult for one single hospital or clinical institution.

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely correct. This work cannot be done by just one centre, either in this country or elsewhere in Europe or the world. It certainly makes sense to connect expertise more, both within our nation and with our partners, particularly in Europe but also across the US.

As of May this year, only 15 active trials were available to brain tumour patients, compared with 54 for pancreatic cancer, which is another disease of unmet need.

A constituent of mine, Daniel, passed away while he was part of the BRAIN MATRIX study. Daniel’s tumour progressed from stage 2 to stage 4 before the pathway could properly inform his care. Does my hon. Friend agree that much more needs to be done, not only to improve primary care recognition and referral pathways for brain tumours, but to maximise access to clinical trials?

Yes, I do. At the front end, we need to improve diagnosis. I have personal knowledge of that through my youngest daughter. Unfortunately, it took some time for one of her friends to be diagnosed with this awful disease, and he is now at a similar stage, where it is extremely difficult for him to receive the treatment he needs. Diagnosis is extremely important.

Clinicians continue to raise concerns about the collection, storage and use of tumour tissue, despite the fact that it is vital to supporting research and innovation. Unfortunately, NHS trusts differ markedly in capacity and resources, creating a postcode lottery for diagnosis and advanced treatments. As we know, brain tumours are complex; there are more than 100 distinct types, nearly 40% of patients in England are diagnosed in emergency care, and the blood brain barrier limits the effectiveness of medicines.

Such challenges have led many to dismiss tackling brain cancer as “too difficult”. That is clearly still an obstacle. We have to break the view that brain cancer falls into that box. In my meetings with campaigners, patients and families, their frustration with that notion is unmistakable. They know, as we do, that with the right support these barriers can be overcome.

The Government have recently announced welcome initiatives, including those in the Rare Cancers Act 2026, the national cancer plan and the brain tumour research consortium, supported by the £13.7 million to unite 48 hospitals, universities, cancer centres and charities in partnership with patients. However, that must be seen as just the first step. Much of this activity simply disburses the remainder of the existing funding pledged, and brain tumours still receive just 3.2% of national cancer research funding.

I have been contacted by constituents on behalf of young adults and children who are fighting for access to treatment. I am afraid that this all became far too real for me this time last year, when a dear friend of mine was diagnosed with glioblastoma; they are now in palliative care, probably with only a short time to live. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we need to boost Government funding into research? As he said, too many companies think that this is just too hard to do, so we need a Government initiative, in partnership with the amazing life sciences innovators in our universities up and down the country, as well as those in industry, to really crack this problem so that families do not face this devastation year after year.

The simple answer is yes, I totally agree. The hon. Lady has summed it up perfectly.

In 2023-24, charities provided 74% of all investment, which of course left just 26% coming from Government. There is a clear link between funding and survival. Investment enables more clinical trials, better patient recruitment and improved access to innovation. I therefore call on the Government to set out how much funding will be ringfenced, and to raise their contribution to between £45 million and £50 million by 2029 in line with the recommendations from Brain Tumour Research.

At the same time, we must recognise that funding alone will not deliver the progress we urgently need. The wider research and innovation environment must be reformed so that discoveries progress more efficiently into clinical development and patient access. Discovery research is essential, yet many innovations still fail to cross the translational valley of death, where fragmented, high risk and unsupported pathways cause breakthroughs to stall.

Stronger collaboration between institutions is needed to accelerate early stage research, and the Government should also clarify the role of UK Research and Innovation within the national cancer plan, given its central contribution to discovery science. In addition, health technology assessment reform is required so that appraisal bodies adopt fairer and more flexible cost effectiveness thresholds for rare and less survivable cancers, including brain tumours.

Patient awareness is essential. As Professor Kathreena Kurian highlighted, many patients are left unaware that they must give consent for their tumour tissue to be used in advanced diagnostics and research. Every eligible patient must have proactive conversations with their clinical team about research opportunities. Greater participation is essential to attract investment, and when trials are easier to set up and recruit for, commercial and academic partners are more likely to set up further studies in the UK.

Alongside that, we must address an issue repeatedly raised by patients and families: the right to pursue innovative treatment when standard options have been exhausted. Too many families find themselves travelling abroad, seeking repurposed drugs or raising money online to access treatments. No family should be forced to remortgage their home, empty savings or appeal to strangers online simply to pursue the possibility of more time. These improvements depend on one further requirement: strong national leadership. Currently, no single body within the Government, NHS England or the wider health system holds clear ownership of brain cancer outcomes. Where responsibility is spread everywhere, accountability exists nowhere. Patients deserve to know who is responsible for delivering change.

Before I close, I will return to the reason the petition exists. In October 2022, Sarah Bainbridge’s daughter Jess was diagnosed with glioblastoma, an aggressive brain cancer that, until then, her family had never heard of. Jess underwent treatment, including two operations, but her family soon realised that once the standard options were exhausted, very few alternatives remained. Like many other families, they found themselves searching beyond established pathways. Jess died in November 2023. She was just 35 years old, and had three children: Alfred, who was five, and one year old twins Billy and Alba. In Sarah’s words: “If I am honest, we have needed Jess every single day since she died, and we still do.”

This is not just Jess’s story; it is the story of thousands of families across the UK. Following Jess’s death, Sarah met Georgie Maynard, a young mother living with glioblastoma. Although their circumstances were different, they shared the same frustration: that patients and families were still facing many of the same barriers identified decades earlier. Together, they founded Brain Cancer Justice, not for sympathy or recognition, but to call for urgent change. It was my privilege to meet with Brain Cancer Justice in the lead up to this debate, and I encourage Ministers to do the same.

This should not only be about recognition or reassurance but about ending broken promises, raising ambition and protecting delivery. Patients and families have waited long enough: we must turn “terminal” into “treatable”.

Order. I am sorry to all hon. and right hon. Members, because I will have to impose a two minute time limit straightaway, and it is clear that we will not get everyone in.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Barker. I thank the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for opening the debate on behalf of the Petitions Committee with his extremely well thought through and detailed opening remarks. I pay tribute to the many individuals who have campaigned, and to the advocacy groups that work tirelessly, to improve outcomes for brain cancer patients. As the petitioners request, investment in research is key. I join them—some are my constituents—in calling on the Government to increase research funding and to go further in legally enshrining the right to try genome sequencing, trials, immunotherapy, and repurposed drugs and vaccines.

I will use my time to highlight some of the progress that has been made in treatment options, because there is some hope. Trials in the USA have shown very promising results for sonodynamic therapy as a treatment for children with the brain cancer known as diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma. DIPG is an inoperable brain tumour primarily affecting children, and it is deemed terminal on diagnosis. The only form of treatment offered is radiotherapy, which may prolong life for a few months at best. On average, the survival rate is less than 10 months.

Sonodynamic therapy uses focused ultrasound to produce a light that interacts with an administered prodrug. It is being worked on now in the USA and progress is being made. I am delighted to say that St Mary’s hospital in London is following suit with some promising results. I am therefore keen to understand from the Minister what the Government’s plans are for rolling out this type of therapy across the UK, and in particular for rolling it out to trials of vulnerable children who are willing to get involved.

I conclude by paying tribute once again to those of my constituents who signed the petition and want to see the Government do their bit.

I thank the hon. Member for setting a fine example of keeping to the time limit.

I thank the Petitions Committee and my friends from Brain Cancer Justice, who I affectionately think of as the provisional wing of the all party parliamentary group on brain tumours.

In July last year, we launched Margaret’s trial at University College London hospital. Thanks to the donations of thousands of supporters and the work of brilliant researchers and clinicians under Dr Paul Mulholland at UCLH, we are testing whether immunotherapy before surgery can help newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients. It is exactly the kind of innovation that we need more of. I was not prepared to wait for the institutions that we look to for progress. We decided to do it ourselves, and that is precisely what we are doing.

We have five people on the trial and space for 11 more. I urge anyone who hears of anybody diagnosed with glioblastoma to consider our trial. It is for newly diagnosed patients pre treatment. It is free. It is available. There will be excellent care. The trial will not only hopefully extend the lives of those who decide to go on it, but give us the information to find out how we can use repurposed drugs to treat this truly terrible cancer as early as possible.

My brother in law Pip Harding, who is with us in the Public Gallery today, was diagnosed with a glioblastoma in March 2024 and given nine months to live. He is still here today, thank God—looking amazing—because he received treatment that cost a huge amount of money, which was crowdfunded. That highlights a very uncomfortable truth in our society: the treatment is there and available, but only for those who can crowdfund or afford it.

I will not go through the challenges, because I know the Minister is well aware of them, but I will talk about the needs. We need clear national accountability for improving brain tumour outcomes. We need sustained and protected investment in brain tumour research so that the funding finally reflects the devastating impact of this disease. We need brain cancer care to be recognised as genuinely time critical, because while tumours can progress in weeks, the system responds in years. We need a truly national brain cancer clinical trials pipeline, and we need the routine collection and storage of fresh frozen tumour tissue for all brain cancer patients.

For families facing diagnosis today, the cost of delay is measured not in statistics, but in lives. The science is advancing. The clinicians are ready. Patients and families are demanding action. The challenge for all of us now is to ensure that the pace of policy finally matches the pace of the disease.

Will the Minister set out how the Government will deliver on these priorities: clear accountability, greater research investment, improved access to clinical trials, routine access to genomic testing and tissue preservation, and better outcomes for brain tumour patients by the end of this Parliament? How will Parliament be able to hold the Government accountable for delivering them? If the system cannot match the pace of brain cancer, it will continue to fail and “terminal” will remain the outcome. We must move from “terminal” to “treatable”, so other families can have the second chance that we have now had with our Pip.

First, I thank all those families in my constituency who have been raising funds for years for the Brain Tumour Charity. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh), who has pioneered our debates on this issue over recent years so effectively, and I thank my friend Sonya Kean, who has consistently brought me up to speed on all the recent developments.

I just want to ask one question, which comes out of the opening speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies). Let me just run through again the stats from the Brain Cancer Justice provisionals, as they have been described: there is a 30% shortfall in consultant radiologists, which he referred to; only 40% of patients report having access to a clinical nurse specialist; there are only 40 consultant neuro oncologists nationwide, so there are huge regional gaps; many trusts lack dedicated trial nurses and clinical nurse specialist support; 60% of pathologists report inadequate staffing and resources; and there is no mandatory neuro oncology training or protected research time.

I have just one question, because it is important to give the Minister time to respond to the debate. I just want to know what immediate action will be taken—now—to address the workforce shortages and how we can develop, in a very limited time, a workforce strategy that addresses some of the issues identified in this briefing.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Barker. I was reflecting with my constituents Greg and Sally, whose son has a brain tumour, when I met them in my constituency office this morning—they also attended the all party parliamentary group meeting a few weeks ago—on what has actually changed since I last spoke in a Backbench Business debate on brain tumours in 2023, and the sorry answer on funding is not a lot, and certainly not enough. In the few moments I have in the debate this afternoon, I want to cut to the chase and ask the Minister some direct questions about how we get that money spent and how we get real results to find cures and ways to prolong lives.

To start on that, we must have a clear breakdown of the total spend on brain cancers by year over the last decade and how that breaks down by actual treatments; research into treatments, including into how much has been spent on trials; research into other areas with a bearing on brain cancer outcomes; research into how each of those involves artificial intelligence; and infrastructure. Specifically, I would very much like the Minister to address the issue of how the Government are planning to make the radical change in approach to brain tumour detection and treatment that is necessary for the UK to achieve its ambition to move from the fourth to the first quartile for survival in nine years. That is a worthy ambition, but we need to see the detail and the concrete steps that will be taken. It will involve answering big questions about artificial intelligence and other innovations.

What I will say in my last few seconds is, given that brain cancer is the biggest killer of under-40s, we need to challenge the idea that it is really a rare cancer and ask whether the definition of “rare” is fit for purpose in the modern age.

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.

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. 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.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I thank the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for speaking on behalf of the petitioners, and I thank the petitioners, who are in the Public Gallery today, for all the work they have done. A particular shout out goes to Sarah—I am thinking of Jess. The issue is not rare. In my constituency alone, Claire in Appleton lost her husband, William, while Stevie in Appleton lost her dad Bubba a month ago tomorrow. In Farmoor, Cumnor and Besselsleigh, three people are fighting for their lives, including my sister, Georgie. Her courage and determination has been fantastic.

I want to focus on a few things. First, I want to advocate for flash frozen tissue nationally, on a mandatory basis. The genetic code in those tumours is the key to solving that cancer and fighting it. At the moment, we are taking a lot of those tumours out and putting them in the bin. That is killing people. If we had a mandatory focus on that at scale, it would be more possible economically, in addition to our moral duty to keep everybody alive for much longer. We should try to push towards that, so that we have whole genome sequencing of those tumours. That is key to making the UK a leader, and it would drive a lot of research funds into the UK. I ask the Minister to consider that.

I have another request for the Minister. There is no single accountable lead for brain cancer now. Thanks to the hon. Member for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur), the Rare Cancers Act 2026 introduced a lead, which is equivalent to 0.1 full time employee. The national cancer plan has put £5,000 towards a lead. Getting a rare cancer lead who is full time and fully accountable would be a great help.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. It is great to see Members in the Chamber in such great numbers. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) for her determination in this area. Through her sheer force of nature, she has raised the funds to start these trials that are now ongoing in memory of Margaret, who we all miss dearly. That is testament to her sheer determination to put this situation right. We are all behind her.

Unfortunately, the experience described by so many Members today—such as that of Margaret, of my cousin Ewan and of so many of our constituents, where fit, healthy individuals are told that there are no further treatments available for them and there is nothing to try or test—is too common across the country. It is what so many of our constituents are told.

I want to press the Minister on some points. As a Government, we have announced more training places in recent weeks. To the point made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell), there are just 40 neuro oncologists with a specialism in brain cancer around the country. Are we allocating some of those training places specifically to solve this problem of the pipeline of doctors coming through? There are just 15 trials going on for brain cancer, compared with 54 for pancreatic cancer. What measures is the NHS taking to inform patients of the trials available to them?

Members are in the Chamber today in great numbers, which sends a clear message to the pharmaceutical industry that we want more emphasis on trials in this area. We will not stand for their inaction any longer. For too long, they have put brain cancer in the “too difficult” box. By showing up in these numbers today, we are showing that the market is failing patients and that they must act. The Government must also use all levers at their disposal to act on this.

Behind every statistic is a human face. For me, it is my senior parliamentary assistant, Dan Horrocks—a father, husband, a four time cancer survivor and a brilliant colleague who has fought this disease for 14 years. We are incredibly proud of Dan’s strength and his tireless campaigning, for which he was deservedly awarded the British Empire Medal in the new year honours list.

Dan’s journey began with persistent headaches. Three separate GPs missed it. It was only caught because of the keen eyes of a local optician at a free eye test. That is the first hurdle: diagnosis. Far too often, symptoms are dismissed as routine migraines, but the second hurdle is even more devastating. Once a patient is diagnosed with an aggressive glioblastoma, they are offered the NHS gold standard of treatment: surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Let us be honest: that gold standard has barely changed in decades. It is designed to manage the disease for a short time, not to cure it, and when it runs its course, our constituents are effectively told to go home and to prepare to die.

These outcomes do not happen by accident. They are the direct result of structures and choices made over many years. When a clinical trial does happen, like the groundbreaking trial established in memory of Margaret, the sister of the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh), it happens because a handful of grieving, determined people refuse to take no for an answer.

If it requires extraordinary political intervention just to start one trial, the system is fundamentally broken, and we need a radical shift. First, we must demand clear, measurable targets, specifying exactly how many clinical trials we expect to see, how many patients will be recruited and who is accountable. Secondly, we need an immediate, aggressive focus on repurposing existing licensed drugs that already control other cancers to see whether they can cross the blood brain barrier and save lives today. We cannot allow the next generation of patients to be left stranded. Dan and the thousands of families like his are not asking for miracles; they are looking for justice.

It is wonderful to see you in the Chair, Mrs Barker. There cannot be many areas of policy where campaigners are asking not for more money, but simply for money that has already been promised to be used. I really hope that the Minister can offer some good news today about the remaining £23 million to £25 million, because there are so many areas where it could make a big difference—and fast. There are doctors and scientists who can see this money but cannot reach it. It is an enormous waste of talent, goodwill and, importantly, hope.

We are three years beyond the point at which all of the £40 million should have been awarded already, yet at the last indication not even half has been issued and spent. That must be beyond frustrating for so many families across the country. Colleagues will have heard me speak about my two amazing constituents Khuram and Yasmin. Their daughter Amani tragically passed away from a glioblastoma in February 2023 aged just 23. Before her death, the family organised Luton Walk of Hope. Amani spoke to those attending, and her words summarised the mission of so many cancer sufferers: “It might be too late for me, but I want to make a difference for others.”

As Amani’s cancer progressed, her parents had to fundraise £100,000 for treatments. No one should have to fundraise to access a drug that could save their lives. Amani’s mum, Yasmin, is in the Public Gallery. She has said that all the fundraising they do is in the hope that brain tumour diagnosis will not have to be a life sentence for others. But brain tumour sufferers and their families need more than hope; they need concrete promises and actions that follow through. That means the dedicated money being spent, expert doctors being listened to, improved diagnosis, timelines for research being set—and, importantly, honoured—and clinical trials being massively expanded. The urgency felt by families needs to be mirrored by policymakers in Whitehall.

It is an honour to serve under your guidance, Mrs Barker. In April 2025, my constituent Phil was diagnosed with aggressive, incurable glioblastoma. Due to the tumour’s location, surgery was not possible, and Phil was given a prognosis of just 12 to 18 months. As parents of two young children, Phil and his wife found themselves navigating a complex system and researching treatments, clinical trials and emerging therapies, and doing so pretty much on their own. Despite evidence suggesting that immunotherapy could help Phil, NHS funding for treatment was denied, and he could only access it through his own tenacity and pharmaceutical company support. Phil’s experience is typical for brain cancer patients, represented by everyone here and beyond: limited treatment options, barriers to clinical trials and being forced to fight your own corner to get anywhere at all.

I thank Phil and his family for sharing his story with me and allowing me to share it with you, Chair, and with the Minister. I also thank the 1,241 people who signed the petition in my constituency, many of whom are directly affected. Alongside everybody here, we simply ask that the Government deliver the full funding promised for brain tumour research. Given that only 12% of patients get to participate in trials, we also ask the Government to ensure comprehensive access to those trials for Phil and for everyone.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I thank the 54 constituents of Newport West and Islwyn who signed the petition calling for an increased focus on tackling brain cancer.

I will speak about Owain’s law, a campaign that seeks to end the postcode lottery across the UK in accessing brain tumour tissue freezing. That is critical for preserving the fresh DNA and RNA samples needed for later advanced genomic testing, clinical trials and personalised treatment. The current postcode lottery in accessing fresh brain tissue freezing means reduced treatment options for many and barely improving survival rates for decades.

I was really pleased to meet Ellie James again last week, after her husband Owain died from a grade 4 brain tumour aged just 35. During his treatment, Owain and Ellie pursued a personalised cancer vaccine using Owain’s tumour tissue. However, just 1 cm of the 7 cm tumour removed during the surgery was fresh frozen. While that allowed three personalised vaccines to be made, when the tumour returned no further treatments could be made. Owain later died in June 2024. No one had discussed with Owain or his family how the tissue would be preserved or the implications of that decision.

Like others, I again press the Minister on whether she will set out a funded delivery plan to close these gaps in freezer capacity. No one should have a postcode lottery on those important matters of life and death. Will she commission new national guidance on the removal and freezing of suitable brain tissue following diagnosis? Owain’s tragic case needs to be learned from if we are to improve treatments for those with brain cancer. Relatively small investments, which are already waiting to be spent, could close the postcode lottery in freezing capacity, ensure uniform quality of care and have the potential to be truly transformational.

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mrs Barker. There are moments that remind us why we are MPs and what we are here to do, and there are people who do the same. Archie Goodburn is one of those people.

I met Archie when he was 23. He is an elite athlete—a Commonwealth swimmer for Scotland. However, Archie has an inoperable brain tumour, and through the most unforgivable sequence of events he was being denied access to a drug that clinicians told him could make a difference and ultimately save his life. The drug is called Vorasidenib. It has been successfully trialled in our health board in Lothian and was available in other parts of Scotland, but not for Archie in Edinburgh. Instead, he was told he could have chemo or radiotherapy, both of which have side effects that could affect his cognitive and—terrifyingly for a potential Olympic athlete—physical ability.

Archie’s story illustrates what is wrong with our current approach to brain cancer—to its research, treatment and the patients themselves. Archie and his family have done a fantastic job, but they should not have to. The money that was promised for brain cancer research 10 years ago is still not fully disbursed or spent. In the petition there are specific asks to ringfence not just that money, but new money; to have a dedicated full time brain cancer lead who has personal experience of the disease; and the right to use drugs that are licensed in this country already for other conditions to see if they work for brain tumours. I feel that the Government are open to those suggestions, because when I raised Archie’s case in the Chamber, a Health Minister came to find me in the Tea Room to talk about it. Another stopped me in Portcullis House to ask about it. I know that the will is there, and I ask the Minister that she carry it through.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Barker. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Newport West and Islwyn (Ruth Jones) for bringing up the case of my constituent, Owain James, whose wife is here in the Public Gallery looking upon us. I will be quick—I would love to talk more about Owain’s case, but my hon. Friend has done that quite eloquently.

There should be no more cases like Owain’s. He was 34 years of age. There was an opportunity to save him. If we had frozen his tumour properly, there might have been an opportunity for more vaccines. Ellie and I recently met the Minister, who was helpful, to talk about freezers that freeze to minus 80°; I understand that NHS England is looking into that issue, and the Minister said that a mapping programme would take place. I wonder whether that mapping will take place, and how it will progress in the future.

Further to that, the most important thing is updated guidance. The guidance should not compromise diagnosis, which must always come first; but once the tissue needed for diagnosis has been secured, services should be encouraged to maximise the amount of sustainable brain tumour tissue that is fresh frozen and stored. Will the Minister confirm whether NHS England will issue or update guidance to relevant neuropathology units on fresh freezing suitable brain tumour tissue, so that patients do not lose future options that might be valuable? Will the Minister also look at surgical consent protocols? One thing that came over from Ellie’s story is that Owain was not sure of the options available to him. Informed consent needs to be given, and it needs to be the consent of the patient. Will the Minister also look into that?

On a personal point, I wonder whether, on those changes being put in place, they could be designated “Owain’s law”. That would be a tribute to Ellie, to her campaigning and above all to the daughter Owain left behind. I know the Minister is compassionate and caring—she was involved in this campaign since long before she was appointed Minister—and I know she will bring good news today.

I am particularly keen to speak in this debate, having had a constituent write to me powerfully on behalf of a close relative with a brain tumour. That constituent rightly highlighted that we must and can do better, not just on research and on improving access to innovative treatments, but in supporting those with brain tumours and their families while they are going through any such treatments.

I pay tribute to the petitioners, many of whom are in the Public Gallery, and to fantastic charities and organisations, including Brain Cancer Justice and many others, for their work. I also pay tribute particularly to the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) who, through her passion and determination, has done so much to raise awareness of this issue in this House and beyond. More importantly, she has not just spoken about that passion, but turned it into a reality for many people. We need to focus on access to innovative treatments when all else has not worked, and on the need for research and progress—something we call for in this debate—but also to do more in real time to support those with brain tumours.

I have several questions for the Minister. What progress have the Government made on implementing each measure in the Rare Cancers Act? On behalf of my constituent who wrote and posed questions, I ask the following. What Government investment is committed year by year to research into brain cancer and its treatments, particularly brain cancers of paediatric patients and young people? How many clinical trials relating to brain cancer are expected to start in the UK this year? What assessment have the Government made of the adequacy of incentives to industry in the 2021 legislation for clinical trials in this area, for research and for participation in the orphan drugs regime?

In this place, and in life, there is a time to act, and I believe that this is that time. We have huge potential and huge talent in this country. Let us help to focus that on saving more lives and giving more precious time to more people.

One of my constituents, Joseph Towers, has experienced at first hand the brutality of brain cancer and the delays in treatment that affect people across the country. I am short on time, so I will say these few things directly to the Minister. The UK ranks 22nd out of 29 wealthy nations for our five year brain cancer survival rate. Other countries are doing it better and we can improve too. One area that we need to improve immediately is access to drug trials. My constituent Joseph was simply lucky to get on to a drug trial; many are not. There are also delays in rolling out medicines once they are approved. His drug, Vorasidenib, had its approval set back by three months because of discussions on changes to its quality adjusted life year scores.

What are the solutions? We need the full time brain cancer specialist within the national cancer plan. We need to spend the money that is already allocated and, of course, ensure future funding. People living with brain cancer need to be allowed access to trials and drugs that are not specifically designated for brain cancer. We are very short on treatments; tumours are often inoperable, so drugs are the main way forward. As the petition says, genome sequencing is vital for developing and delivering treatments. We need to understand the market forces determining which conditions get privately funded by pharmaceutical companies, and fill the gaps where needed.

We also need to make sure that bureaucracy does not delay drug trials. Yes, drug trials take time to ensure safety and efficacy, but too often what takes up time is delays in approval and funding, rather than the science. When patients are excluded from a trial—for proper scientific reasons and for the veracity of the trial—I would argue for compassionate access to those drugs alongside the trial.

We owe it to Joseph, to the families who have contacted us ahead of the debate and to every person who will receive this devastating diagnosis to do better and to move far more quickly than we are moving today.

I call Ann Davies.

Diolch yn fawr, Mrs Barker; it is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. It is a privilege to talk today on behalf of my constituents about the impact of living with a brain tumour. They have raised four similar concerns: far too little research, the need to improve therapies, a lack of clinical trials and the preservation of tissue. Improvements in those areas would give those living with brain tumours a fighting chance to survive and thrive.

One person who has been able to thrive after her diagnosis is my constituent Mared. Mared was a hugely talented singer songwriter who went by the stage name of Swci Boscawen. She was 26 when her brain tumour was diagnosed; after receiving surgery, she lost the ability to sing and compose, but in recovery she discovered a passion for art as a form of therapy. She adopted the new name of Swci Delic, and her musical creativity changed to artistic creativity. She lives locally. Her cancer is still there, but she lives a fulfilling life within her physical ability. Her artwork can be seen around Carmarthen town, created with the engagement of local young people. Nathan, who was in school with my daughters, is also living with a brain tumour, and his story is very similar to Mared’s. Both of them started with GP visits because of severe headaches, and both eventually received brain scans that confirmed their diagnosis.

My ask of the Minister is very simple: can we please have a greater percentage of funds for brain tumour research, as well as clinical trials and further treatment options for patients, leading to better outcomes for our young people? Today I have been given the privilege of being the voice for Mared, Nathan and others like them, and I hope that the Minister will be able to address their concerns.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Barker.

Brain cancer is one of the most devastating diseases facing families across our country, and it kills more people under the age of 40 than any other cancer. I want to highlight the experience of one of my constituents, Ellen. Her husband Jason, an Army veteran from Mansfield and a father of two, was diagnosed with a brain tumour. Ellen told me that when they received the diagnosis, their “world completely fell apart”. Since then Jason has relied on private treatment, including treatment overseas, at a significant cost to the family, and has struggled to access clinical trials despite wanting to take part in them. Their experience raises an important question: are we doing enough to ensure that brain tumour patients can access every possible treatment opportunity?

I would welcome an update from the Minister on what can be done to improve access to clinical trials for brain tumour patients. I pay tribute to the outstanding work of the Brain Tumour Research centre of excellence at the University of Nottingham; through advanced imaging, genomics and innovative new approaches, it is helping to drive progress in the fight against this terrible disease. For families like Jason’s and Ellen’s, this is not an abstract policy issue, but a daily reality. We owe it to them and to all those affected by brain cancer to support research, improve diagnosis and give this disease the urgency it deserves.

It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I thank the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for opening the debate on behalf of the Petitions Committee.

I speak on behalf of my constituents and the people of Northern Ireland, who are facing a quiet but devastating crisis. By the year 2035, the number of brain tumour cases in Northern Ireland is projected to skyrocket by some 36%. Those are our mothers, our fathers, our siblings and our children—yet today, despite the standard pipelines of surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy, the average survival time for an aggressive glioblastoma remains a heartbreaking 15 months. Queen’s University Belfast’s Johnston cancer research centre is making massive, globally recognised strides. Our local clinical teams are exploring rapid nanopore sequencing to drop diagnosis times from weeks to mere hours. I put on record my thanks to Brainwaves NI, which is fundraising all the time in Northern Ireland.

I have three asks of the Minister. The first is UK wide collaboration, working directly with the Northern Ireland Department of Health to ensure that our local institutions are fully integrated into all national brain cancer clinical trial networks, which they are not at present. The second is to support the pooling of resources, so that promising lab discoveries at Queen’s University can break through the bureaucratic barriers and reach patients at the bedside even faster. The third is to address the practical hurdles for families, ensuring that if a cutting edge trial is available only across the water, financial support for travel is readily accessible to my constituents in Strangford and across Northern Ireland.

Our scientists have the will and our patients have the courage. I gently say that this Government—my Government, my Minister—must do more to provide the backing.

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I pay tribute to all those who signed this petition and to Brain Cancer Justice. I have been invited to speak this evening by one of my constituents, Owen Sutton, who currently lives with a brain tumour. He was diagnosed at university and is now an ambassador for the Brain Tumour Charity. Some 13,000 people are diagnosed with a brain tumour every year. When I counted earlier, there were 35 people in this room—that is equivalent to the number of people diagnosed every day.

Research from the Brain Tumour Charity has also estimated that there are huge long term costs associated with the low survival rates of brain cancer. Loss of earnings and long term care costs amount to £18.7 billion, which is felt by both the economy and the NHS. Currently, brain tumours account for just 3.2% of the national cancer funding, despite being the biggest killer of adults under 40.

Patient polling found that less than half of respondents had been informed of the option to participate in a clinical trial, with just 12% ultimately taking up that opportunity. I therefore support the national cancer strategy’s ambition to make the NHS the first choice venue for clinical trials, but I also advocate that perhaps a right to try option should be incorporated into that—something Owen wanted me to mention.

In keeping with the universal values of the NHS, we hope that all those affected by brain tumours can have access to world leading treatments, so I support calls to increase the funding and to spend the money that we know is already due to be spent. We must all carry the strength and inspiration of Owen’s story, choosing hope over fear and turning the terminal into the treatable.

I will begin by paying homage to a young girl by the name of Eiliyah: when her tumour took over her right hand, she began to learn to draw with her left, because she loved arts and crafts more than anything else. When she could not dart around any more, she started to bum shuffle everywhere. She was unfortunately diagnosed with DIPG, one of the most aggressive childhood brain tumours known to medicine. The family had a bit of hope but, before proper treatment could start, the tumour returned again. Her family could only watch as she lost her movement, her speech, her sight and finally her ability to eat. She died on 2 May this year, surrounded by those who loved her. She was just a child.

Eiliyah’s aunt asked me quietly to speak for her today, but I would like to speak quietly also for my own sister, only a handful of years older than me, who went from full of life to grade 4 glioblastoma and then death in under six months. During that time, she was barely offered any treatment at all, and what she was offered was decades old. That is the heart of the problem: as we have heard today, brain cancer is the biggest cancer killer of children and adults under 40, yet our survival rates lag behind most of Europe. Nowhere is that cost clearer, as we have heard, than on tissue freezing, so will the Minister commit to a national standard for tissue freezing?

I ask the Minister for three things: first, to increase brain cancer research funding urgently and substantially, with ringfenced investment for diseases such as DIPG; secondly, to ensure that every patient can access whole genome sequencing; and, finally, to enshrine the right to try—the right to reach clinical trials, innovative treatments and immunotherapies even when standard treatment has failed. Treatments have not meaningfully changed in decades. Eiliyah deserved better; my sister Shahida deserved better; Owain deserved better; the families who will hear the words “brain cancer” for the first time this week deserve better. I urge the Minister to act, and to act now.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I thank the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for securing the debate. He is a true champion for people suffering with brain cancers. I also pay tribute to and recognise the excellent work of the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh).

I pay tribute to everyone who worked hard on this important petition, especially Georgie Maynard and Sarah Bainbridge. It was a privilege to join Georgie and other campaigners in March to submit the petition to No. 10. A brain cancer diagnosis is utterly devastating and life changing. More than 12,000 people a year are diagnosed with this brutal condition.

Zoe Wilson was a well loved English teacher, a dedicated mother to her two boys, John and Mark, and wife to Matthew. She was the kind of neighbour who delivered fresh baked goods to your doorstep. Will my hon. Friend remember her with me, and thank Matthew for his continuing work, ever since losing her, for better outcomes for others?

I thank my hon. Friend for talking about Zoe Wilson. For her family, it must have been absolutely devastating to have had that diagnosis. I am happy to mention her, alongside him, in the debate.

Brain cancer has one of the lowest survival rates of any type of cancer, with only a quarter of adults surviving five years after they have been diagnosed. Diagnosis is often too late, and access to groundbreaking treatments is not widely available. It is a scandal that so many people live in treatment deserts and are forced to drive long journeys for treatment, often after weeks of waiting for it to begin. My Liberal Democrat colleagues—I am sure everyone in this Chamber—believe that everyone deserves high quality care, no matter where they live. That is why we have long been calling for an end to the postcode lottery in healthcare.

Shamefully, the UK is lagging behind comparable nations in brain cancer treatment. I recognise that research into brain tumours is uniquely challenging, and yet with our world beating life sciences sector, universities and the NHS, the UK should be a world leader in cancer research. My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I welcome the national cancer plan. The plan’s commitment to improve early diagnosis of brain cancers, to introduce new target treatments and to incentivise research and investment in rare cancers, including brain cancer, are positive steps forward, but turning those commitments into impacts will need leadership, investment and accountability, all of which are proving difficult in an NHS engaged in a distracting and costly reorganisation, at a time of already highly constrained resources and unprecedented demand.

Furthermore, the plan’s goal for the UK to be in the top 25% of countries for brain cancer survival rates by 2035 could be seen as a lack of ambition, given the potential of the UK life sciences and research sector. For the UK to become a world leader in cancer research, the Liberal Democrats would pass a cancer survival research Act, requiring the Government to co ordinate and ensure funding for the least survivable cancers, including brain cancer.

Does the hon. Member agree that the Government should clarify more details of the funding announced, the funding allocated and the funding actually paid out under the existing funding plan since 2018, and should work harder to speed up the distribution of funding, not just the amount of funding that is in the pot?

The hon. Member makes a very good point, and I absolutely agree with her. In that context, it is it is shocking that much of the funding promised for research in honour of Dame Tessa Jowell in 2018 is yet to be spent. Still about 75% of brain cancer research funding comes from charitable organisations; not enough comes from the Government.

This is an issue close to my heart, because I lost both a friend and a mentor in the late, great Tessa Jowell to this dreadful disease.

Brain cancer has also impacted many of my constituents and their families, including Lorna, who is currently supporting a family member through her diagnosis. So, given that there are 13,000 new cases recorded each year and research spending lags behind need, does the hon. Gentleman agree that much more must be done to deliver better and more effective treatments?

The hon. Member is absolutely right that we need to spend more on investment in research and treatment.

In addition, the Tessa Jowell Brain Cancer Mission estimates that just over two thirds of treatment centres in England currently offer whole genome sequencing, which is essential to provide improved diagnosis and treatment options. Advances in genomics have offered great promise to people with brain cancer and the UK has taken steps to become a world leader in genomic research. However, progress has stalled, with genomic services across the UK not being set up to facilitate research. To ensure that brain cancer patients do not miss out on potentially life saving treatment, the UK’s national test directories need to be expanded.

Sadly, many people with brain cancer were let down by the last Conservative Government, who broke their promise on a 10-year cancer plan, which would have made a real difference to patients. The national cancer plan will hopefully be an opportunity to address meaningfully many of these issues, including patchy data collection and shortages in the cancer workforce.

On that last point, it is worth mentioning that we, NHS staff and patients are still waiting for the long delayed workforce plan. It was due in the spring, but we will soon be in mid summer. A workforce plan is so important. We need further investment in the research workforce, with support for clinical and non clinical career development to build our research capacity. As others have already said today, the development of a proper and improved workforce plan is desperately needed.

That is why the Liberal Democrats would start a fellowship programme for US cancer scientists who have seen their funding gutted by Donald Trump. We would waive burdensome fees and bureaucracy for international researchers. Astonishingly, global talent visas for top researchers cost £6,000 per person for a five year visa. So, a leading scientist has to find £24,000 if they have a partner and two children who they want to bring to the UK with them. That is much more expensive than most of our competitor countries, where the cost is typically £200 or £300 per person. Do we really need to make it so expensive for much needed research talent to come to the UK? And can the Minister look at this issue?

For the sake of patients and their families, I hope that—

Does my hon. Friend agree that what is needed right now is leadership, and that the large number of MPs in this Chamber today are looking towards the Minister and urging her to lead on this issue?

I thank my hon. Friend for that very good intervention, which is also very timely as I come to the end of my speech. She is absolutely right that leadership is needed. I have every confidence in this Minister that there will be some leadership, and I think that the large number of MPs in this Chamber today shows that there are many people in this Parliament who want her to succeed and to show the leadership that we need.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship this evening, Mrs Barker. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for opening this important debate, and to other right hon. and hon. Members for their contributions to it. I also pay tribute to Brain Cancer Justice and to all the people—over 109,000 in total—who signed this petition to ensure that we have had the opportunity to debate this important issue here today.

At its heart, this debate has been about the patients, families and loved ones whose lives have been irreparably changed by a brain tumour diagnosis. For many families, of course, that diagnosis arrives suddenly, although too often it is also delayed.

My constituent from East Grinstead, Holly Vivian, an NHS nurse, is very concerned about late diagnosis, particularly given her own medical training, saying that she was concerned and was not diagnosed until she had her second child because of pregnancy symptoms. Whether it is the constant headaches that we have heard about today, or light vomiting, it is really important to give those patients the best chance to be heard.

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for sharing Holly’s story, which sadly, is far too frequent. I remember from my time in clinical practice that those subtle signs were sadly sometimes missed. We need to do much more to ensure that our clinicians are aware of them so that they can make an early diagnosis.

Of course, when those diagnoses arrive, it is inevitably devastating. It turns lives upside down in an instant. Parents are told that their child has a condition with few treatment options, husbands and wives are forced to confront an uncertain future and children become carers. Families who should be planning birthdays, holidays and life milestones instead find themselves navigating endless hospital corridors, scans and treatments. Behind every statistic is a person and behind every policy discussion is a family desperately hoping for more time.

Today, I want to particularly recognise the courage of those families whose stories have been shared, often while living through the most unimaginable grief, so that others might one day have a better chance. I also want to pay tribute to the remarkable charities, researchers, clinicians and campaigners who have worked tirelessly to keep this issue on the national agenda: organisations such as the Brain Tumour Charity, Tessa Jowell Brain Cancer Mission, Brain Tumour Research, Cancer Research UK and countless others that have not only supported patients and families, but have driven forward research, awareness and innovation.

To add to that collection of notable charities and individuals, Brainwaves NI has done substantial fundraising and has helped to add to the research at Queen’s University and others. There are many others, and we cannot mention them all, but every one has done a grand job and we owe a debt to them that can never be repaid.

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. There are countless charities that have done a huge amount of work, and what they are doing is making a tangible difference to people’s lives.

Sadly, brain tumours remain one of the most challenging forms of cancer. In many instances, outcomes are no better than when I worked as a doctor in neurosurgery almost a decade and a half ago. The less survivable cancers taskforce has highlighted that one year survival rates for less survivable cancers, which include brain cancers, remain significantly lower than the average across all cancers. Despite advances in medicine, outcomes for many patients have not improved at the pace that we would all wish to see. That is why the concerns raised by the petitioners are so important. Quite rightly, the petition calls for greater investment in research, wider access to whole genome sequencing and stronger support for innovative treatments. Those are priorities that cannot be ignored any longer.

However, before I turn to those challenges, I want to take a moment to acknowledge the progress that has been made. The National Institute for Health and Care Research has established the brain tumour research consortium, which has brought together dozens of organisations to co ordinate research and is backed by up to £25.5 million of investment. The recently enacted Rare Cancers Act 2026 represents another significant step forward, and I want to commend the hon. Member for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur) for his work in bringing that legislation on to the statute book.

The establishment of the national speciality lead and a dedicated cancer registry service have the potential to improve co ordination and data collection and strengthen research. The national cancer plan has recognised rare cancers as a priority area and committed to expanding successful models such as the Tessa Jowell Brain Cancer Mission. Those developments are of course all welcome. As His Majesty’s loyal Opposition, we supported the Rare Cancers Act throughout its passage through Parliament because we recognise that patients with rare cancers deserve the same urgency, focus and ambition as those with more common conditions.

However, the reality is that legislation alone does not save lives; the real test is the effectiveness of its implementation. I would therefore be grateful if the Minister could update us on what progress has been made in establishing the new structures required under the Rare Cancers Act. In particular, has the national specialty lead been appointed? When will the rare cancer registry become fully operational? How will success be measured? Patients and families deserve to know when they will begin to see tangible benefits from the legislation that Parliament has passed.

The petition also raised important questions about research participation and access to innovation. The Tessa Jowell Brain Cancer Mission highlighted that fewer than 5% of eligible adult brain tumour patients were able to access whole genome sequencing because of limitations in tissue sampling and biobanking capacity, which is deeply concerning. Genome sequencing has enormous potential to improve the understanding of tumour biology, identify personalised treatment pathways and increase participation in clinical trials. However, opportunities remain unevenly distributed across the country. The Brain Tumour Charity has also highlighted significant variations in infrastructure and staffing across neuro oncology centres.

As the hon. Gentleman describes, there is a postcode lottery in the treatment that people can access. In Hastings, a patient has to do a four hour round trip to Brighton hospital to receive their basic treatment. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we must address this postcode lottery in brain cancer treatment?

The hon. Lady is absolutely right that when someone is facing a devastating crisis, but has to travel excessive distances to get the treatment they deserve, there is something wrong with the system.

If we are serious about accelerating research, we must ensure that every patient has a fair opportunity to participate in it. That requires investment not only in laboratories and technology, but in a workforce that supports research and clinical innovation. What specific action are the Government taking to address those disparities and ensure that advances in research can benefit patients regardless of where they live?

The petition also reflects a wider frustration felt by many families facing brain cancer. When conventional options are exhausted, patients understandably look to emerging treatments and clinical trials with hope. Such hope is entirely understandable, but at the same time we must maintain rigorous standards of safety and evidence. The challenge for us as policymakers is not choosing between innovation and safety; it is ensuring that innovation can be assessed, trialled and adopted as quickly as possible, when the evidence supports it. That is why clinical research capacity and trial recruitment matter so much, and it is why access to cutting edge treatments must remain a key priority.

On that point, the Government have committed to increase spending on branded medicines, and they have set out ambitious objectives for expanding participation in commercial clinical trials. Of course those ambitions are welcome, but they must be matched by delivery. The Office for Budget Responsibility has estimated that increasing spending on branded medicines will carry significant costs over the coming years, so can the Minister explain how the Government intend to fund those commitments? Patients need confidence that the announcements we hear today will be translated into treatments tomorrow.

Similarly, while we welcome the publication of the national cancer plan earlier this year, questions remain about its implementation. The shadow Health and Social Care Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Daventry (Stuart Andrew), supported the ambitions set out within the plan. However, he quite rightly called for clear, funded milestones, and those questions remain unanswered. When will the Government publish measurable targets for rare cancers, and how will progress be reported?

For all the challenges that we have discussed today, it is important that we recognise the reasons for hope. Medical research continues to achieve what once seems impossible. Just a few years ago, diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma was regarded as one of the most devastating childhood brain cancers, with very few children surviving beyond two years. However, through participation in innovative clinical trials, a young boy from Belgium named Lucas Jemeljanova experienced something quite extraordinary. Having been diagnosed at six, he entered the trial and, over time, scans showed a shrinking tumour, which eventually disappeared altogether. Lucas is now 13, and he is considered cured.

With every breakthrough that provides a scientific curiosity, the challenge before us as a Government, as an Opposition and as clinicians and researchers is to ensure that those breakthroughs happen more quickly and often, so that they can reach patients quicker. That is what the families behind this petition are seeking, and they deserve no less.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today, Mrs Barker. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for introducing the petition on behalf of the many people who signed it and secured the debate today. It has been so well attended, as we can see from the number of Members here and the fact that the Gallery is full, which really shows its importance.

Earlier this month, I was honoured to join a meeting of the all party parliamentary group on brain tumours, which was also very well attended, and to hear the personal stories and lived experience shared by those affected by brain cancer. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) for her tireless work as the chair of the all party group and for her committed campaigning on behalf of brain cancer patients in memory of her sister Margaret McDonagh, who so many of us knew so well and remember so fondly.

A remarkable North Somerset constituent, Jane, is watching this debate. Having been diagnosed in March last year with an incurable brain tumour, Jane has asked me to speak in the debate, because she wants us all to understand what it feels like to be told, “Treatment will manage your tumour, not cure it.” Does my hon. Friend agree that my constituent Jane is not just brave, but amazing?

Absolutely. I cannot think of a worthier cause than turning brain cancer from terminal to treatable. That is something that we can absolutely all get behind. I am especially grateful to Brain Cancer Justice, which led the campaign for the petition and this very well attended debate, as well as Brain Tumour Research and the Brain Tumour Charity. They all do fantastic work advocating for people diagnosed with a brain tumour and their loved ones.

Since this Government came into office, over 232,000 more people got a cancer diagnosis or an all clear on time, about 42,000 more patients started treatment on time, and rates of early diagnosis are hitting record highs. A lot has been done, but there is a lot more to do, especially on rare and less common cancers. That is why my predecessor, my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton), made sure that the national cancer plan would be the first plan in history to have a chapter dedicated to rare cancers.

There are not enough treatment options available for people with brain cancer. I have spoken to so many patients and campaigners who are searching for that glimmer of hope on clinical trials. This desperate search takes a real toll on them, not to mention their families and carers. We will prioritise their access to specialist treatment and multidisciplinary teams, and we want to ensure that all patients with rare cancer can benefit from the best care available. We will work with charities to make sure that patients are getting the right information to manage their cancer care. We are rolling out Jess’s rule and tracking cancer diagnosed in emergency settings.

Notwithstanding the important points raised by the shadow Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Solihull West and Shirley (Dr Shastri Hurst), about robust safeguards in the testing of new treatments, the United States has legislated for a right to try for those who have got to the point at which they have little other option left. Will the Government look to that model to ensure that brain tumour patients can have the right to try innovative new treatments?

I am certainly happy to look at the model in the US around the right to try.

I also want to update the House that we are appointing a national clinical lead for rare cancers, who will sit on the national cancer board. The benchmark is to improve outcomes and five year survival rates for 14 less common cancers, including brain cancer. I know that Members will all hold us to account on that score.

I join the Minister in paying tribute to the many brain cancer patients and their families who have campaigned for change. They include Joanna and Dennis from Beckenham and Penge, who lost their son Ollie at just 29 years old, and Tessa Jowell, who brought national attention to brain cancer nearly 10 years ago when she was diagnosed. I had the honour of working for her, and she would have been my neighbouring MP. I do a lot of work with the Tessa Jowell Foundation; tomorrow is their gala dinner in the Olympic Park, another legacy of Tessa’s. Will the Minister support the foundation’s calls for faster access to trials, including the right to try, precision medicine, equitable care regardless of postcode and—as Tessa would say—patient centred care, helping people to live well with cancer and not simply die of it?

I thank my hon. Friend for raising the late, great Tessa Jowell in this debate. I had the privilege of being the shadow Health Minister and speaking in one of the debates we had in the House, and her legacy does live on.

I must move on, because I want to talk about brain cancer research.

Will the Minister give way?

This will have to be the last intervention.

On the fully accountable lead, there are two positions: one has £5,000 in funding and one is 0.1 of a full time employee. Will the Minister commit to one person who is fully funded and fully accountable, please?

I will come back to the hon. Gentleman’s point. I really do have to get through some things and respond to the number of people who spoke about brain cancer research, because nearly all hon. Members mentioned that.

Through the National Institute for Health and Care Research, we have directly invested more than £32 million since the general election. My hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley and so many other colleagues mentioned the £40 million commitment for brain cancer research in 2018 and the fact that it had not all been spent. Prior to the general election in 2024, that was the case, but I can confirm that since the general election, the spend from NIHR programmes alone has now been in excess of £40 million since 2018.

That £40 million is not a funding ceiling. We will continue to fund research that is recommended by our funding committees and independent peer reviewers. That includes more than £25 million for the NIHR brain tumour research consortium, which brings together 48 organisations across the UK in a national, co ordinated effort to help deliver better research faster. We are also partnering with Cancer Research UK, providing almost £3 million to co fund the brain tumour centres of excellence; this collaboration will accelerate the delivery of innovative treatments to patients. We will continue to build on our investments and fund high quality brain cancer research.

As we reaffirmed in the national cancer plan, the Government will implement the Rare Cancers Act in full, starting with the appointment of an NIHR national specialty lead for rare cancers this summer. That appointment is under way, and that person, once appointed, will make sure that we are delivering research for patients. Implementing the Act will also make it easier for researchers to connect with patients living with rare cancers, including brain tumours, and streamline recruitment into clinical trials.

Our 10-year health plan will make the UK a global leader in clinical research, because we want every patient in the country to have the chance to sign up to a clinical trial should they wish to do so. The hon. Members for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood) and for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding) and my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield (Steve Yemm) all asked me about clinical trials. We have announced a clinical trials accelerator, Be Part of Research, which allows users to search for relevant studies and register their interest.

I turn to brain tissue freezing and to the specific points raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly (Chris Evans) and so many others. Earlier this month, I met him and other colleagues, as well as Ellie James, the campaigner for Owain’s law. Can I just say how moved I was? My hon. Friend knows that no one can fail to be moved by Ellie’s story. She spoke for many people, not just in Wales but across the United Kingdom, and I have asked the NHS to take action.

NHS England has completed a gap analysis of the need for freezer capacity, as my hon. Friend mentioned, and is looking at how to support services to provide an equitable expansion of that capacity. I have also asked the Department and NHS England to work with professional bodies, including the Royal College of Pathologists, to review tissue retention guidance and consent processes, which is what we discussed. We are looking at ways to support trusts to expand freezer capacity, and I will be happy to update colleagues in the autumn.

My hon. Friend the Member for Hastings and Rye (Helena Dollimore) and my right hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) asked me about workforce. We will be publishing the 10-year workforce plan imminently; it will set out action to create a workforce ready to deliver the transformed services set out in the 10-year health plan.

I want to end by saying that I do not see it as my job just to represent the Government to patients and campaigners. It is also my job to be their voice in Government, and I take that role very seriously. For the last 20 years, I have sat where other Members are or where the shadow Minister is, so I completely understand where everyone is coming from. I think I am going to run out of time, but 35 Back Benchers have spoken—

Order.

Motion lapsed, and sitting adjourned without Question put (Standing Order No. 10(14)).