Latest news with #TomTugendhat
Daily Mail
a day ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
QUENTIN LETTS: Something ominous was in the air, and possibly soon in your veins...
The assisted dying vote was reported at half past two. 'Unlock!' said Speaker Hoyle, and his voice went all strangulated. Had someone slipped Mr Speaker a lethal dose? It was that sort of a day. Jangling. Something ominous in the air. And possibly soon in your veins. Four hours' talk of death made for an incongruous Friday this flaming June. Outside, the blessings of creation twinkled under a blue sky. Inside the chamber, MPs anguished over death-bed agonies and the prospect, some feared, of disabled or anorexic patients being hastened to their Maker. The state would now 'exercise power over life and death', said Tom Tugendhat (Con, Tonbridge). Supporters of the Bill heckled him. But he was only reflecting the reality if this Bill is passed by the Lords. The Upper House may disagree. The majority of 23 felt slender. Brexit had a majority of over a million and the Lords did its best to kibosh that. Chi Onwurah (Lab, Newcastle C) noted that private companies, as well as the state, would now be able 'to kill citizens'. My dears, we're going private for Grandpa. So much quicker, and they'll play Vivaldi's Four Seasons to muffle the sound of his death rattle. Ms Onwurah's was one of three or four speeches that appeared to start with one position and concluded with the opposite. The debate drifted like seaweed. A strong speech for choice from Kit Malthouse (Con, NW Hants) would be balanced by an affecting plea from Jen Craft (Lab, Thurrock) to think of pressure being placed on disabled people. Ms Craft has a daughter with Down's syndrome. Kim Leadbeater (Lab, Spen Valley) was her usual chirpy self as she moved her private Bill. She bounced about, grinned exhaustingly and said 'this is a robust process!' and 'take back control of your dying days!' Death by exclamation mark. There was a dissonance between her bleak obsession and this Butlin's redcoat persona. Ken Dodd playing an undertaker. One eloquent supporter of her Bill was Peter Prinsley (Lab, Bury St Edmunds), a doctor with 45 years' experience. He and John McDonnell (Ind, Hayes & Harlington) lent welcome age to that side of the argument. Others throbbed with the certitude of youth and, one fears, the naivety of new MPs yet to learn how officialdom mangles noble legislative intent. A former NHS manager, Lewis Atkinson (Lab, Sunderland C), insisted hospitals would cope. They always say that. More persuasive support for the Bill came from an intensive-care nurse, Sittingbourne's Kevin McKenna. He had trust in doctors. Do you? After so many NHS scandals? 'I wouldn't put my life, or the life of someone dear to me, in the hands of a panel of officials,' grunted Diane Abbott (Lab, Hackney N). Three times she spoke of 'the vulnerable and marginalised'. But Hanover-born Wera Hobhouse (Lib Dem, Bath) was indignant that constituents had told her that MPs were too stupid to care for the vulnerable. 'Ve haf to educate people!' fulminated Frau Hobhouse. Sarah Olney (Lib Dem, Richmond Park), shouting like a Sergeant Major, attacked the Bill's workability. Her colleague Luke Taylor (Sutton & Cheam), not the nimblest of orators, gripped a text of his speech tightly with his thick fingers and deplored 'the status crow'. It was a matter of 'how one might exit this earthly realm', he averred, more Mr Pooter than John Betjeman. James Cleverly, in the Man From Del Monte's suit, kept touching his heart as he feared money would be diverted from elsewhere in the NHS. We kept hearing the term 'a fundamental change'. When relations were bumped off, would suspicion be seeded? Mark Garnier (Con, Wyre Forest) was pro the Bill but admitted: 'I'm not the world's greatest legislator.' Oh. The most troubling speech came from a vet, Neil Hudson (Con, Epping Forest). Having killed many animals, he reported that 'the final act doesn't always go smoothly or according to plan'. He 'shuddered to think' what would happen when an assisted death turned messy.
Spectator
12-06-2025
- Health
- Spectator
Letters: How ‘Nick' could save the Tories
Dying wish Sir: As a 99-year-old with, presently, no intention of requesting assistance to die, I am struck by the articles of Dan Hitchens and Tom Tugendhat ('Bitter end' and 'Killing me softly', 7 June), which base their strong opposition on the opinions of everyone other than the person supposed to be requesting such assistance. He or she, poor soul, is expected to just lie there and listen to whether they are to be allowed to have any opinion at all on the matter. It's my life they are writing about. At present I have the ability to end it whenever I might wish. What Messers Hitchens and Tugendhat are arguing is that, if I change my mind, no one is to be allowed to help me at a moment of my choosing. That's wrong. Alan Hall Westerham, Kent Life lessons Sir: In response to Tom Tugendhat, having seen a friend suffering with severe agitation because of uncontrolled pain, my concern is that there is a strong disincentive for medical practitioners to provide adequate pain control, as adequate doses can exceed the upper limit of the 'normal' recommended range, leaving the doctor liable to litigation. My proposal is to introduce a form of advance instruction from patients: Pain-relief Over Prolongation Of Life (POPOL). Similar to the Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) for life-threatening medical emergency advance instructions at the front of the medical record, this would make it clear that the patient and relatives stipulate giving enough analgesia to control pain, despite the likelihood of it shortening life. It would have similar status to the DNR. This could be relatively easily adopted and would provide a much less controversial way than 'assisted dying' of achieving what many people want – a pain-free death. Having advanced cancer myself, I can strongly empathise with a wish for this path to be followed, which indeed it often was when I first qualified 45 years ago. Dr Ros Furlong MBBS FRCPsych scientific adviser to SANE London N6 Saving Nick Sir: Your recent leading article rightly identifies Nick, the archetypal 30-year-old, as at the thin end of the wedge (31 May). Traditionally the Conservatives stood for him, empowering Nick to acquire capital, a home and a family. Shifting to side with those who already have something, and against those striving to acquire it, is what made the party lose its compass. I founded the group Next Gen Tories (NGT) to put Nick back on the radar. Tackling Nick's challenges is the key to reversing both the UK's economic decline and the party's. We must return to the popular capitalist vision which has been a hallmark of every other postwar Conservative government. If Nick wants to save himself and arrest the country's decline, he should join the Conservatives to force this change of pace. James Cowling London SE10 Brought to book Sir: Having taught A-level English literature for nearly 30 years, I can't agree with Philip Womack's assertion ('Literal disaster', 31 May) that some students' difficulty in interpreting older texts is a sign that 'the foundations of western culture are teetering into collapse'. Part of the joy of teaching literature is to guide students sensitively through the social and historical contexts of a text and build a bank of cultural capital for their future reading. I still blush when I recall my inability to 'elicit a scintilla of sense' from 'The Convergence of the Twain', Hardy's poem about the sinking of the Titanic. 'How could it be an august night,' I asked my teacher, 'when the ship sank in April?' Andy Simpson Sandbach, Cheshire Sir: Christian Wolmar's advice on Chinese banquets (Notes on, 31 May) is sound but incomplete. While it is important to pace yourself and to avoid the host, who is duty bound to press every dish upon you, there are other factors to remember. A refusal always offends, as does slow, reluctant consumption. My friend, a notoriously picky eater, recognised he must take part in the banquet for the good of his business, and managed to conceal a shudder as he accepted the proffered entire chicken foot. He coped by eating it quickly. His speed was taken as enthusiasm and his delighted host immediately offered him another. Joanne Aston Norby, Thirsk Period pains Sir: Madeline Grant is quite right to decry the distortion of history in recent shows ('The sad decline of period dramas', 7 June). The worst offender in this respect, of course, is one William Shakespeare (1564–1616). How much does his Richard III owe to the historical king? Not a lot, but he owes a mountain to Holinshed or, worse, to Thomas More. So much for character but, as for gender, don't get me started. His Joan of Arc was played by a boy, as was his Ophelia. For convenience naturally, and misrepresentation if you will. In the eyes of our national Bard, so it would appear, history is not in the past. It is in the present, and so are we. Robert Fraser Emeritus Professor, English and Creative Writing, Open University Tapioca heaven Sir: Olivia Potts rightly celebrates tapioca (The Vintage Chef, 31 May) but fails to mention the sublime payasam served in Tamil Nadu. This milky sweet cardamom-scented tapioca pudding has only one drawback: it is very difficult to eat with your fingers. But delicious nevertheless. Caroline Walker Beaminster, Dorset Write to us letters@
Sky News
05-06-2025
- Health
- Sky News
Mum who abused son so badly he had to have his legs amputated to be freed early from prison
A mother who abused her child so badly he had to have his legs amputated is to be released early from prison. Jody Simpson and Anthony Smith were both jailed for 10 years in 2018 for torturing their son, Tony Hudgell, who is now 10. He was just 41 days old when he was assaulted by the pair and left untreated and in agony for 10 days. The attack caused multiple fractures, dislocations and blunt trauma to the face, leading to organ failure, toxic shock and sepsis. The damage meant both his legs had to be amputated. Simpson was due to be released on licence at the halfway point of her prison sentence in August 2022. However, then justice secretary Dominic Raab referred her case to the Parole Board and her release was put on hold. A spokesperson for the Parole Board on Wednesday confirmed Simpson was set to be released. Paula Hudgell, Tony's adoptive mother, criticised the decision in a social media post. "Tony has life long injuries every day he suffers due to her hands," she wrote on X. Tony's case led to a public outcry and calls for child abusers to be given life behind bars. Tory MP Tom Tugendhat, who led a campaign for the changes, which are also known as Tony's Law, said on X: "I'm backing Tony as he faces the early release of his abuser - his birth mum. "Tony lives every day with the pain caused by her crimes as a baby. We must do more to protect children like him." Tony has since gone on to be a successful fundraiser for charity - for which he has been honoured by the Royal Family. A statement from the Parole Board said: "We can confirm that a panel of the Parole Board has directed the release of Jody Simpson following an oral hearing. "Parole Board decisions are solely focused on what risk a prisoner could represent to the public if released and whether that risk is manageable in the community. "A panel will carefully examine a huge range of evidence, including details of the original crime, and any evidence of behaviour change, as well as explore the harm done and impact the crime has had on the victims." It added: "Parole reviews are undertaken thoroughly and with extreme care. Protecting the public is our number one priority." A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: "This was a horrific crime that saw Tony Hudgell mercilessly tortured by his birth parents and our thoughts remain with him and his loved ones. "Now that the independent Parole Board has directed her release, Jody Simpson will be subject to strict supervision and licence conditions. She faces an immediate return to prison if she breaks the rules."
Globe and Mail
02-06-2025
- Business
- Globe and Mail
Britain needs energy. Canada has energy. Why can't we work together and dream big?
Tom Tugendhat is a member of Parliament in the United Kingdom and a former security minister. The King of Canada's first Speech from the Throne last week made two things clear: First, those who moved to the true north and stayed loyal to the Crown are still strong – and free to choose their own path; and second, no two countries could be closer than the United Kingdom and Canada. For centuries, we have stood together in peace and in war, in economic expansion and in political transformation. We're not just a historic alliance with a symbolic bond of monarchy; we're bound by mutual sacrifice and a shared vision of the future. Today, the world is making clear why that connection matters to us both. In Britain, shortsighted decisions have left our homes and businesses more exposed to energy instability, while on the Canadian side, the Prime Minister has made clear there are good reasons to question the reliability of the country's most important energy partner. As Canada's new Energy Minister, Tim Hodgson, put it in Calgary: 'It's high time to trade more with people who share our values – not just our border.' No country fits that description better than Britain – and we need the same. More infrastructure needed to boost energy security in Eastern Canada, Hodgson says Even with the oil and gas reserves of the North Sea, Britain's energy position is more fragile than many realize. Despite the rhetoric of decoupling and the transition to green energy, Europe remains bound to unstable energy flows, and Britain is not immune. At the same time, the North Sea is fuelling less and less of our economy, as excessive taxation and long-term decline are restricting output, while renewables are a long way from fully replacing carbon-based energy. The result is that Britain, a country that once powered the world, is now looking at a future dependent on regimes that don't share our values – and the price we're paying is huge. British manufacturers now face industrial energy costs nearly three times those of their U.S. competitors and more than 50 per cent higher than those in France, a crippling impact on our competitiveness. The costs push businesses out of Britain, leaving us reliant not just on energy supplies from foreign countries – often with authoritarian governments – but also their manufactured goods. This isn't just about economics, it is about sovereignty. No country that prizes its independence should accept that, but it's not like we don't have a choice. Canada offers Britain a better path – one that also gives Canadians a choice. Alberta has the world's fourth-largest proven oil reserves, and by 2030 Canada's oil sands will produce nearly four million barrels a day. Most of that is slated to cross the southern border. But Canada offers not just volume but reliability. Alberta's energy is governed by the rule of law. It is extracted by workers who are paid fair wages under transparent environmental rules. It is not subject to the whims of oligarchs, mullahs or party bosses. It is democratic power, energy we can trust. Britain can open up new markets and be an even more important partner for Canada. Quebec's position on the Atlantic, with about a fifth of the country's gas reserves, could go beyond its famed hydropower and supply our islands and Europe, reducing the continent's dependence on Russia, the Middle East and coal. Together, Canada and the United Kingdom can make each other stronger. But it does not stop there. Bringing in Australia and New Zealand, we could create a CANZUK energy framework. CANZUK countries have a combined GDP of about $7.5-trillion. That's nearly double the GDP of Japan and, though smaller than the European Union's $19.4-trillion, is a democratic counterweight with the potential to lead. Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand share a monarch, common law and similar approaches to trade and regulation. What distinguishes us is largely administrative: visas, regulations and trade barriers. These are not problems of culture or principle. They are challenges of will. These obstacles should be footnotes, not strategic barriers. It's important that we resolve to fix them, starting with the mutually critical domain of energy. Canada's oil and gas can meet Britain's needs as we shift away from existing supplies. Australian uranium can power a nuclear revival, while New Zealand's renewable innovations can accelerate the clean transition. In return, Britain can provide financing, engineering and reach to speed outreach beyond the alliance. The free movement of skilled workers would see the benefits of collaboration multiply: Aberdeen's engineers in Alberta, Canadian experts in British nuclear, Australian scientists shaping clean fuel strategies across the network. This is not just trade. It is sovereignty through solidarity and independence through energy. For Canada, having options other than the United States protects its sovereignty and strengthens its negotiating position with its neighbour. King Charles spoke to Canada's strength and freedom and to the family of nations that has stood strong through history's greatest tests. Now, as the democratic world faces a new challenge of instability and economic coercion, the ties that bind us must again become instruments of strategic strength.
South Wales Argus
14-05-2025
- Politics
- South Wales Argus
Caerphilly MP Chris Evans is Commonwealth War Graves Commissioner
Mr Evans visited the Commonwealth War Graves Commission (CWGC) headquarters in Maidenhead on May 13 to receive his warrant of appointment. The warrant was signed by the King. He was joined by the Tom Tugendhat MP, who was also appointed a commissioner. The CWGC, which has been around for more than 100 years, works on behalf of the governments of the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, India, and South Africa. Its main aim is to commemorate the 1.7 million men and women from the Commonwealth who died in the two world wars. Mr Evans said: "I am greatly honoured to have been appointed by His Majesty, The King, to become a Commonwealth War Graves Commissioner. "It is vital that we always remember and commemorate the many men and women across the Commonwealth, and across Wales, who sadly died during the First and Second World Wars. "Future generations need to know and recognise the sacrifices that were made for the many freedoms we enjoy today. "I look forward to supporting the global work of the CWGC over the coming years to the very best of my abilities."
