Children’s School Meals

Debate between Lord McColl of Dulwich and Baroness Barran

Monday 27th March 2023 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

As the noble Baroness knows, we keep the eligibility for free school meals under constant review, but the House is also aware that eligibility for free school meals has never been higher. This Government introduced universal infant free school meals and free school meals in further education. Now, in schools, 1.9 million of the most disadvantaged pupils are eligible for free school meals.

[Lord McColl of Dulwich (Con)]

My Lords, demonising fat is the wrong attitude. Clearly, we need to avoid saturated fats but other fats are actually good for us and limit obesity, because when fat goes into the duodenum it releases hormones that inhibit the emptying of the stomach, giving us the feeling of being full, so we stop eating. Fat should not be demonised by the Department of Health or anyone else.

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

I am not aware that anyone is demonising fat, but there is a very serious issue about education. The percentage of children who are either overweight or obese rose very sharply during lockdown. We must absolutely do everything we can in our schools and health services. We also need to make sure that parents really understand the implications of what they feed their children.

School Meals: Funding

Debate between Lord McColl of Dulwich and Baroness Barran

Tuesday 13th December 2022 Lords Chamber

[Lord McColl of Dulwich (Con)]

My Lords, does the Minister agree that it would be a good idea to concentrate on the content of these meals? In particular, could she use her influence to ensure that the meals contain the right kind of fat? When fat goes into the duodenum, it releases hormones that delay the emptying of the stomach and make one feel full earlier on, hence reducing the tendency to obesity—which is rather important in view of the fact that half the children in this country are obese.

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

My influence may not extend to duodenal fat levels, but I will do my best to support my noble friend. I would like to ask the House to share my impression of what is going on in many of our schools. I visited a primary school on Friday where they are bringing the kitchen into the classroom and are preparing healthy meals with children, building their awareness of both the content and cost of their meals; that is something that is very important for their futures.

Social Care: Children

Debate between Lord McColl of Dulwich and Baroness Barran

Wednesday 22nd June 2022 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

The Government are considering all 80 recommendations in the report, of which this is an important one. We have identified the five priority recommendations, but the implementation board will report back on all our actions by the end of the year.

[Lord McColl of Dulwich (Con)]

My Lords, I welcome the focus that the review has placed on supported lodgings. However, work still needs to be done to enable supported lodgings to become a fully recognised provision. Will the Government commit to meeting Home for Good, a charity that has recently set up a supported lodgings network, to provide a definition and guidance on this provision?

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

My noble friend raises an important issue. Indeed, one of the young women to whom I was speaking just before this Question talked about exactly the point that he raises. I would be delighted to meet the organisation that he mentioned.

School Curriculum: First Aid Training and Home Nursing

Debate between Lord McColl of Dulwich and Baroness Barran

Thursday 16th December 2021 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

I am delighted to reassure the noble Baroness on that account and to share that with my ministerial colleagues in the department.

[Lord McColl of Dulwich (Con)]

My Lords, it has been mentioned that the kiss of life is no longer part of CPR because of Covid, but in fact it was given up before that because it was recognised that there was enough oxygen in the blood. The great thing is to get the circulation going as the essential part of CPR.

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

I thank my noble friend for that very helpful technical clarification.

Channel 4: Funding and Governance

Debate between Lord McColl of Dulwich and Baroness Barran

Thursday 1st July 2021 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

The noble Lord will be aware that I have often quoted both my right honourable friend the Secretary of State and the Minister for Media and Data, who have both been absolutely clear about wanting to see a thriving PSB sector, which is particularly important in a time of misinformation and disinformation.

[Lord McColl of Dulwich (Con) [V]]

My Lords, what means are open to the public and the authorities to encourage Channel 4 to report the news in an accurate and unbiased way and thereby triumph over the present, frequently prejudiced environment of the media?

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

If my noble friend or any members of the public have concerns about the accuracy of any broadcaster, including Channel 4, they can send those concerns to Ofcom.

Office of Communications: Chair

Debate between Lord McColl of Dulwich and Baroness Barran

Thursday 18th March 2021 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

The noble Lord raises a very important point. Work is already starting within Ofcom to recruit the appropriate skills and experience that will be needed to deliver on the online safety regime, including the recent recruitment of a head of emerging technologies from Google.

[Lord McColl of Dulwich (Con) [V]]

My Lords, can the Minister give the House any valid reasons why the committee wants the power of veto over such appointments?

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

I am afraid I do not follow my noble friend’s question, so, if I may, I will write to him.

Online Harms Consultation

Debate between Lord McColl of Dulwich and Baroness Barran

Wednesday 16th December 2020 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

On the noble Baroness’s first point, I understand why she asks about it and we have given the matter careful consideration. Platforms will need to prove that children are not accessing their content by sharing any existing age verification or assurance information, by reviewing the data on their users. They will need to evidence that in a robust way to satisfy Ofcom. I shall take back the point regarding the Christchurch video. I know that my right honourable friend the Secretary of State talked about how he valued the expertise of both Houses, so I hope that is a warm note regarding scrutiny.

[Lord McColl of Dulwich (Con) [V]]

Because of its focus on user-generated content, it is quite clear that the online harms Bill greatly weakens the protection afforded to children in relation to assessing pornographic websites. This House determined that they should be provided through Part 3 of the Digital Economy Act, as the noble Baroness, Lady Benjamin, mentioned. Who has pressed the Government not to implement Part 3? What should I tell a concerned father who contacted me this morning, saying, “The Government promised to protect children from pornographic websites, not just user-generated content on pornographic websites”?

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

I understand my noble friend’s concern but, as I said to the noble Baroness, Lady Benjamin, the vast majority of pornographic content that children come across is on social media rather than online pornography sites, and those online sites are often intertwined with user-generated content. So we are confident that the vast majority of content will not be accessible to children.

Charities: Funding

Debate between Lord McColl of Dulwich and Baroness Barran

Thursday 29th October 2020 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

I understand the noble Baroness’s concern, but the Government have already focused on prioritising charities. The £750 million support package that we announced in the spring was the first sector-specific support package that the Government announced. Since then, billions have gone to charities and social enterprises, principally through the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme. We have also been active, working with philanthropists, raising an extra £85 million recently for charities across the board.

[Lord McColl of Dulwich (Con) [V]]

My Lords, does the Minister agree—and in her answers so far it would seem she does—that there are many honest, law-abiding citizens who wish their donations to charity to remain secret for perfectly legitimate reasons, not least of which is their wish to avoid boasting about their generosity?

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

I absolutely agree with my noble friend.

Folic Acid

Debate between Lord McColl of Dulwich and Baroness Barran

Tuesday 18th June 2019 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Barran]

I may need to write to the noble Baroness about the specific medication. More broadly, she is right that the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition has looked at these issues. Also, Food Standards Scotland has updated the guidance. They support the mandatory inclusion of folic acid as long as it is combined with a reduction in the level of supplements such as those that exist in breakfast cereals. In the consultation the data is set out about the percentage of people whose intake might be above a tolerable threshold, and it is extremely low—between 0.5% and 1%.

[Lord McColl of Dulwich (Con)]

We must be sure that the right dose of folic acid is applied. The Americans did not put enough folate in; their dose was probably half what it should have been. Will the Minister ensure that the right dose is applied here?

[Baroness Barran]

Yes.

Organ Donation (Deemed Consent) Bill

Debate between Lord McColl of Dulwich and Baroness Barran

Committee: 1st sitting (Hansard): House of Lords
Friday 1st February 2019 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

I wonder whether the noble Lord could be mindful of the time taken for his remarks.

[Lord McColl of Dulwich]

What is the limit? My apologies.

I return to my basic question and ask whether the Minister can confirm—[Interruption.] I am speaking to two amendments; 15 minutes each makes 30 minutes. Can the Minister confirm that the Government intend to define widely the word “information” in proposed new subsection (6B), introduced by Clause 1(4), so that if someone said, “I am convinced that my husband was unaware of the deemed consent law and would have opted out had he known, so you should not take the organs”, this would be regarded as meeting the definition of “information” in the Bill? If the answer is yes, I will happily withdraw the amendment and I will not die in a ditch for my second amendment, but it is entirely reasonable to suggest that the people of England deserve the same statutory assurances on advertising as the people of Wales. I beg to move.