Parkinson’s Disease

[Emma Lewell in the Chair]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered e-petition 713714 relating to funding and care for people with Parkinson’s.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. The petition calls on the Government to increase funding for people with Parkinson’s and to implement the five steps of the Parky charter. With more than 113,000 signatures, the petition is not just a call for change; it is the collective voice of a community that has waited too long for meaningful action.

Parkinson’s is one of the fastest growing neurological conditions in the world. It affects more than 116,000 people in the UK, and that number is expected to rise to 173,000 by 2030. These are not just statistics; they are our neighbours, friends and family members. Behind each number is a story of resilience, daily struggle and hope.

The Parky charter is a powerful five-point plan created by the “Movers and Shakers” podcast group. It is backed by Parkinson’s UK, and aims to improve the lives of those living with Parkinson’s. It calls for faster access to specialists; clear and immediate information; a Parkinson’s passport to ensure joined-up support; comprehensive support across health and social services; and renewed investment in research for a cure.

Will my hon. Friend give way?

Will my hon. Friend give way?

There is a competition. I will give way first to my hon. Friend the Member for Derby South (Baggy Shanker) and then to my hon. Friend the Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore).

Initiatives such as Derby County Community Trust’s Parkinson’s walking football programme are doing fantastic work to boost physical health and build a community for people with Parkinson’s. Does my hon. Friend agree that, by coupling investment in the Parkinson’s support workforce with such community initiatives, we can help every person with Parkinson’s to live with the dignity and support they deserve?

I absolutely agree. The strength of the community around investment and specialist support is of key importance.

As the son of someone suffering from Parkinson’s—both my uncles have Parkinson’s and my grandad sadly died of Parkinson’s complications—I was struck by the fluctuating nature of the condition. Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the best parts of the Parkinson’s passport is that people will not have to go through reassessment, when we know that this degenerative condition will only get worse for many people?

I will refer to that later, but I absolutely agree. The fluctuating nature of the illness means that we have to provide that.

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Oh, go on, before I start again—I will only lose my place otherwise.

The hon. Gentleman is being incredibly generous, and I thank him for his excellent introduction. Given that the condition is often degenerative and that, tragically, people do not get better from it, it is not outrageous that a number of integrated care boards—including mine, Lancashire and South Cumbria—are reassessing people with Parkinson’s for continuing healthcare, and that many of them are losing that care? Does the hon. Gentleman agree that that is wrong, and that people with such conditions should be able to guarantee that they will get the support and healthcare they have had for many years?

I agree. I will refer later to ICBs, which clearly have to ensure the full, necessary support, particularly for this community. I understand the pressures they are under—we all do—but taking away support from people is a much bigger issue than people not getting support in the first place. I am sure that all of us across the House would like to work on that issue.

This plan is rooted in lived experience and offers a practical road map for change, including renewed investment—I say that to give some context; otherwise we will lose track of where we are. In April, during World Parkinson’s Day, I attended the Big Sing for Parkinson’s. That uplifting event was quite amazing and inspiring; it was full of energy, music and community spirit. It was organised by the same “Movers and Shakers” group I referred to earlier, and brought together people living with Parkinson’s, and very importantly their families, in both London and Huddersfield.

I had the pleasure of speaking to Mark Mardell, the former BBC political journalist and the lead petitioner—he is sitting at the back of the Public Gallery, and I thank him very much for the petition and for the work he is doing. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] He shared his personal journey with me and emphasised the urgent need for reform. Like the charter, the Big Sing is a celebration of resilience and a call for action.

Since July 2024, the Government have taken the following steps. The autumn Budget last year included a £600 million increase in social care funding and an £86 million boost to the disabled facilities grant. In April 2025, the Government reaffirmed their commitment to improving outcomes for neurological conditions, through initiatives such as the RightCare toolkit, the Getting It Right First Time programme and the neurology transformation programme. Spending review 2025 also pledged £29 billion in additional NHS funding by 2029, including £10 billion for technology and GP training. This is just the start in addressing the needs of those living with Parkinson’s.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today, Ms Lewell. Earlier today, I was at the Parkinson’s event in the Palace, and I spoke to a surgeon who treats Parkinson’s patients every week. He told me that if more people were seen earlier, he could ensure better outcomes. Does the hon. Member agree that this battle is partly about funding that is needed now, rather than later down the line?

Once again, I absolutely agree. I will certainly refer later to funding, which is a key issue. This is about resources and about making sure that that help is there as quickly as possible. Obviously, the longer it takes to provide that support, the more this disease hits people—the impact is far greater.

The Parky charter also addresses the personal independence payment system. As we know and as was said earlier, Parkinson’s is a fluctuating condition, and assessments often fail to capture its complexity. The Government are now working with Parkinson’s UK and individuals with lived experience to reform the PIP assessment, aiming to make it much more reflective of fluctuating conditions. The review is expected to report in autumn 2026, and the Minister has pledged that the voices of the Parkinson’s community will be central to the process. The Government have expressed a desire to return to routine face-to-face assessments, but have also indicated that for those with very severe conditions, full assessments may be waived if sufficient medical evidence is provided.

In terms of treating those suffering from Parkinson’s, does the hon. Member agree that best practice should be shared across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland so that everybody gets the best treatment right across our United Kingdom?

I could not agree more. I will speak later about the postcode lottery, although it is not just a postcode lottery; it is across the whole nation. The hon. Member is absolutely right: we should be doing everything we can to ensure consistency of support and adequate support across the nation.

Innovation also offers hope. Produodopa—I think I probably said that better today than the last time I was here—was approved for NHS use in 2024. Earlier today, I was at an event organised by Parkinson’s UK and I was talking to a specialist—a neurologist—who was talking about the impact of medication and how much difference that will make. It was fascinating, and that five minutes was of huge value in helping me to understand the impact.