Whilst I respect that there are a small minority of people who require specific definition(s) as that satisfies their mental capacity to manage something, there are millions in this country, under the current pandemic circumstances, who are suffering with mental health issues. Yes, some people are more resilient than others, but to start categorizing and listing who is suffering what, and to what to degree, is subjective, irresponsible and in my opinion without foundation.

In my opinion, as this matter is so widespread and being experienced by so many people of all ages, there is a need to address with kindness and with support all aspects of mental stresses and when the lockdown allows, family and community interaction will be a welcome step toward enabling people to emerge from a very unique circumstance. Then as those that can recover, recover, they can help their neighbors and loved ones to come through their issues so that you end up with the worst cases then being more easily identified but they may not be severe in the medical terms you have mentioned above, they may be people who cannot get back to the position and person they were before.

Using the methodology that is proposed, you start from the point of excluding everyone you can, denigrating their condition as lesser than someone else's and in essence you are missing the point of being part of the human race, where we collectively support each other with humanity for the betterment of the species, not strike out, and determining that you/others are better at evaluating other people's condition.

Imagine in the current circumstances, that all the virologists and scientists decided they had to categorize all the people who had caught Covid to higher or lesser degrees and would only produce vaccine for those with the severest cases. That is in essence what you are proposing for mental health treatment. The virologists and scientists have worked collectively for the good of the species. They are not excluding anyone and it has been done without fear or favour and with good will and humility. I think I prefer their way of working.

I have just received two replies from two Ministers about the £10 million that is being spent in our schools over the next three years to combat and enforce discipline in our schools, for what is termed "low level disruption in the classroom".

Part of this money will be used to construct “isolation pods" within approximately 500 school environments.

It does not take a significant mind leap that amongst the children who are being disciplined by this Conservative policy, are many of the OCD sufferers that you mention here.

The rules for isolation and punishment are for matters like fidgeting, using a stress ball or its equivalent, talking in corridors, not having your tie straight and other minor misdemeanors' which in the real world, are not considered as important for action.

In my opinion it is imperative on all Conservatives to understand, to learn lessons, and realise that what Mr. Ratner is saying is not unique to just OCD. It applies across all condition’s children may experience and whilst he has turned his point of view into a numeric equation and highlighted the OCD cost to the country, I proffer that it is underestimating the issues and that the amount is probably tenfold higher than his significant, but focused grouping.

I am not undermining or criticizing what Mr. Ratner has said. I am intentionally agreeing but expanding on it because OCD is often present as a component of other conditions. It is time all Governments became more aware of the impacts and value that can be achieved for the Country dealing with these matters more purposefully and in the right way.