(10 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI thank the Backbench Business Committee, on which I served many years ago, and the right hon. Member for Haltemprice and Howden (Sir David Davis) for bringing forward this important debate. That so many Members are present shows the importance of SEND education to our young people.
People are disabled by barriers in society, not by difference. Children with special educational needs and their families in Leeds North West are consistently made to feel that they are the problem. The system is a complete mess. There is a huge shortage of specialist provision and enhanced mainstream provision, so children are forced into schools that do not have the expertise to manage their needs. That leads to exclusion, isolation and children being withdrawn. Support staff do not have adequate training or care, and many are paid less than those working in supermarkets.
The number of children with special educational needs and disabilities who are either excluded or waiting for a place at a school has jumped by almost a third since 2020. The severe delay in children receiving EHCPs means that families in Leeds North West have been left in the dark for months about which secondary school their child will attend. That is especially distressing for children with autism, who often struggle with routine changes and would benefit massively from knowing where they will be placed.
One of my constituents told me that it took until the end of year 6 for their child to receive an EHCP, which is far too late to secure a place for specialist provision for year 7. Only this December, in year 9, has my constituent’s son been able to secure a place in specialist provision—that is three years too late. He will never be able to get back those years of his childhood spent struggling with no support for his complex needs.
Early intervention is non-existent. In many hospitals, an initial appointment at a child development centre has a waiting list of more than 18 months, but after waiting 18 months, it is not really early intervention any more, is it? Health visitors are unable to identify children who need speech and language therapy interventions, because they only have time to visit for child protection. Although child protection is vital, we need a holistic approach for children.
Child and adolescent mental health services are on their knees. Leeds CAMHS is taking on only the most egregious cases, as it has huge waiting lists, massive underfunding and a workforce crisis. It is estimated that only one in four children who need help for mental health issues obtain access to CAMHS services.
I wish to look briefly at some positive examples of provision in Leeds. I recently visited two settings with my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn). We went to a specialist Lighthouse School for young people with autism in my constituency and to the Vine, which is part of Leeds City College, in my right hon. Friend’s constituency. I had one of the most challenging and interesting question and answer sessions with a group of young people. The first question put to me was: what is the meaning of life. As I am sure all Members here know, that is not the normal question we would get when we go to school Q&A sessions.
My answer was 42, referencing Douglas Adams, which all the young people understood far better than me. They were a very bright and articulate bunch, but they were there because of the school and the additional support that it provided. Lighthouse is struggling for funding. It is a charity so, as well as the funding that it receives, it gets additional funding and support from charitable means, but that should not be how a school operates. It should be able to survive and thrive on statutory funding.
The Vine is a specialist facility for profound and multiple learning difficulties, with a very challenging cohort of young people, many of whom are non-verbal. The families we spoke to were so grateful for the provision, but we need so much more. Its facilities include a hydrotherapy pool, rebound facilities and sensory perception rooms. It is the only place in Leeds that offers such facilities, so it attracts people from miles away.
Making sure that we have suitable schools and services for these children should be a priority, but, unfortunately, due to the Government’s abandonment of funding for local authorities, Leeds City Council does not have the budget to manage and enhance these school places. This is not just a systematic let-down. To knowingly force children into school placements that we know are not right for them, or simply to accept the fact that they will not receive any education at all, is neglect, and I am afraid the neglect of vulnerable children amounts to abuse.
(1 year, 6 months ago)
Commons ChamberI thank the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion (Caroline Lucas) for securing this debate on an important yet under-discussed subject.
The United Kingdom is
“one of the world’s most nature-depleted countries”.
Those are not my words but the words of Lord Goldsmith, a Government Minister. Research by the Natural History Museum has revealed that the UK ranks at the bottom of the G7 in biodiversity preservation. In fact, we find ourselves languishing in the bottom 10% of all countries. There will be people in this place today who have repeatedly heard that statistic from me and others so, although I apologise for sounding like a broken record, I want the House to consider how serious the situation is for our beloved natural environment.
For nature to recover and thrive in the UK, we need to manage our land and ecosystems in a way that restores biodiversity and leaves room for nature, part of which involves having a stronger connection to nature. Research shows that people with a strong connection to nature are more likely to behave positively towards the environment. Establishing a long-lasting connection between people and nature would play a crucial role in ensuring the conservation of precious wildlife, habitats and species in the future. It is quite simple: the more people engage with nature, the more likely they are to protect it.
The green space we currently have access to provides significant benefits, especially for our physical and mental health and well-being. Research suggests that access to nature saves the NHS approximately £110 million a year in fewer GP visits. That fact was starkly reinforced during the pandemic, when many people gained a greater appreciation of nature, green spaces and local parks.
My hon. Friend the Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) was spot on when she talked about the environmental improvement plan, the need for more ambition and the lack of discussion of equality within the EIP. She was also right to acknowledge Chris Smith’s important role in opening up access to nature, which we need to expand, delivering much more of it. My hon. Friend the Member for Wirral West (Margaret Greenwood) rightly linked access and health, reminding us of the Marmot review and of those great and brave pioneers who climbed Kinder Scout. I climbed there myself just after the pandemic restrictions were lifted.
However, accessible nature is distributed unfairly across England. In 2020, Friends of the Earth’s “green space gap” report highlighted that 40% of people from ethnic minority backgrounds live in the most green space-deprived areas, compared with 14% of white people. We heard a great tour of constituencies and their surrounding areas from Conservative Members, including the hon. Members for Worcester (Mr Walker), for Gloucester (Richard Graham) and, perhaps most expansively, for Isle of Wight (Bob Seely). He knows that I lived on the Isle of Wight for a year. I particularly recall the dark skies there and the ability to see the beautiful starscape. Again, the Glover review recommended giving young people access to those dark skies. He made some excellent points that I am sure we will discuss in future.
The Government commissioned the Glover review to assess the 70-year-old protections that led to the creation of England’s national parks and AONBs. The review was clear in calling for a stronger focus on natural recovery and improving the state of the national parks in the UK. It also called for greater access to our countryside, citing the barriers to access for children, minority ethnic groups and those living in the most deprived areas of England. It was a comprehensive and important review.
National parks were created in part to provide a healing space, both mentally and physically, for the many who had given so much to protect our country during the second world war. They were meant for everybody. The Glover review recognised that, stating that
“it feels wrong that many parts of our most beautiful places are off-limits to horse riders, water users, cavers, wild campers and so on. We hope that”—
the Government—
“will look seriously at whether the levels of open access we have in our most special places are adequate.”
It is perhaps unsurprising that the Government failed to address the adequacy of open access rights in their lacklustre response to the Glover review when their interests so closely align with those seeking to prevent it. The Minister will no doubt extol the virtues of the EIP, which promises to ensure that everyone lives within a 15-minute walk of blue or green space, but there has been no detail on how that will be achieved. I hope that she will give us some of that detail today. Currently, nearly 2.8 million people in the UK live more than 10 minutes’ walk from green space. So where is the road map to achieve that goal? Where is the road map to achieve 15-minute access?
We need a robust strategy that goes beyond the Conservative’s ambition for ambition’s sake. That is why Labour will take tangible action to ensure every Briton is able to access the nature our country has to offer. We will introduce a right to roam Act, a new law allowing national parks to adopt the right to wild camp, as well as expanding public access to woodlands and waterways. As has been said by the shadow Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West and Royton (Jim McMahon), Labour will give the
“right to experience, the right to enjoy and the right to explore”
our countryside, as opposed to the current right to roam, which gives people only the right to pass through.
Labour will improve the quality of our national parks and expand the area of national parks, AONBs and SSSIs that the public can experience, enjoy and explore. A Labour Government will also ensure that there are sufficient responsibilities and protections to manage and conserve our natural environment for all.
It is interesting to hear the plans from the Labour party, which I welcome, but could the hon. Member answer a question about the kind of right to roam Labour is supporting: is it the universal right, based on the Scottish model, or is it a more specialised one, based on exclusions?
The hon. Lady is prejudging the conclusion of my speech, but perhaps I will get to that now and put her out of her misery. Like in Scotland, Labour’s approach will be that our right to roam will offer access to high- quality green and blue spaces for the rest of Britain. We will replace the default of exclusion with a default of access and ensure the restoration and protection of our natural environment. I hope that that answers her question.
The hon. Lady seems to indicate that it does, so I will try to find the space further back in the speech and not repeat that point.
Currently, only 3% of our rivers are accessible to the public, although perhaps that is not such a bad thing for swimmers, given the state of our waterways under the current Government. Labour will end 90% of sewage discharges by 2030 and introduce strict penalties for water bosses who fail to comply. Only the Labour party will ensure access to clean rivers, lakes and seas, so that those swimmers and other water users can enjoy them. Of course, it is important that any expansion of access encourages responsible behaviour, with measures to protect our most vulnerable habitats and species from harm. By incorporating responsible practices into our access rights, we can ensure the wellbeing of our environment for generations to come. That is a far cry from the attitude of the Government, who currently spend less than £2,000 per year on promoting the countryside code.
In conclusion, Labour will create a future where nature thrives, people have a deeper connection to the environment and everyone has equal access to the benefits of green spaces.
(1 year, 9 months ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I will speak mainly about ADHD because we have limited time, but I want to put on the record that autism services need more resources, and autistic people deserve support and aftercare following diagnosis.
Currently, as we have heard, there is no NHS waiting time standard for ADHD assessment. It is not generally measured and reported, so we have to use anecdotal evidence. In Leeds the waiting time for the first appointment is a minimum of two years, although it is often much longer. Adult ADHD services are a postcode lottery. Some areas have no adult ADHD service at all, and many others have waits of five years-plus.
On top of long waiting times and limited support, people with ADHD are often stigmatised. I have heard people deny its existence, claiming that children with the condition are simply not disciplined properly, and that adults just need to grow up and take responsibility for their shortcomings. Others say, “Everybody has those symptoms.” Of course, anyone can struggle to concentrate or might sometimes act impulsively, but having numerous symptoms present from childhood that are so intense and frequent that they take over your life is a very different thing. Neuroimaging studies have shown that there are structural differences in ADHD brains. ADHD is real, and without treatment it can ruin lives. Why, then, are clinical staff not routinely trained in adult ADHD?
One person I know was told that their GP refused to refer them for an assessment because they had what they considered to be a “good job” and so could not possibly have ADHD. I am sure that the academics, authors and MPs I know with ADHD would disagree. I want to share something that a constituent told me:
“As a child I was always the class clown type, constantly in trouble. At 9 years old I was taken to the doctors, who essentially told my mum that ‘boys will be boys’. As the years passed, my life became progressively more unmanageable. I drank and took drugs to excess, was unable to manage my finances, and ruined many of my relationships and friendships. The cycle repeated endlessly, until one day a friend who taught at a college said she reminded me of a few of her students who had ADHD. I looked into it and realised I ticked so many boxes, so approached the NHS for a diagnosis, and was put on a lengthy waiting list—with no information about how long I would have to wait for my assessment.”
They went on:
“A few months later, I was handed a short prison sentence after a violent offence. After getting out a few months later, I tried once again to contact the NHS team, but to no avail. It didn’t take long for the drink, drugs and reckless spending to start again. I was also made homeless. Eventually, a support worker got me an appointment with the NHS ADHD team. I was told that I did have ADHD but that my life was too chaotic to start treatment. Shortly after, I ended up back in prison. After getting out I managed to find a flat, got a really good job, met my partner and my life was going well. But as anyone with ADHD will attest to, healthy routines are almost impossible to keep up without proper support, and it wasn’t long until old habits crept back in.”
I listened very carefully to that story. The hon. Gentleman’s mention of the criminal justice system allows me to intervene to say that there are grounds for hope, because 48 neurodiversity support managers have been appointed in our prison system, with more to come, to screen and identify people with neurodivergent conditions. Does he agree that that is a step forward that is long overdue?
Absolutely. In a BBC interview in 2019, I called for compulsory screening and diagnosis for everybody who received a custodial sentence. So many people in our criminal justice system have ADHD, and we would save far more money if we screened and gave people treatment, rather than making them go through the awfulness of that experience.
My constituent continued:
“I realised I needed help, and contacted the NHS ADHD team that gave me my original diagnosis. I was told that even with the diagnosis, it would be an 18-month-plus wait and I would have to start the process all over again. In the end, I went private, which is extremely expensive. I pay a monthly fee for the calls with my doctor, a fee for the prescription, and a fee for my medication. It comes in at around £500 a month, which I can only afford because my mum died last year and left me some money. It was a struggle finding what worked for me, but I’m now on a treatment plan, which has changed my life. I don’t drink anymore, my relationship with my partner has improved dramatically. I’m managing my finances better and my performance at work is a level I’ve never hit before. Life is just so much easier and happier now.”
For so many, their ADHD is not known to them. They are not aware that they have it, but it is sitting there undiagnosed. Someone may know something is different about them, but they do not know what it is. Some people cope, but others just do not. My constituent’s story shows the transformative power of an ADHD diagnosis and treatment. It shows how people are increasingly turning to the private sector for help. I have to say that that appears to suit the Government’s agenda—to encourage provision out of the NHS and into the private sector.
ADHD and autism services are in crisis. They need proper funding for training, screening, diagnosis and aftercare. I do not want to live in a country with a two-tier healthcare system, where those who can afford it get support and the rest are left to suffer. I hope the Government will heed the calls made today and act to fix their broken system.
(2 years, 6 months ago)
Commons ChamberI am told that driving licences are now being issued faster than they were. I am also told that there are no delays in successful online driving licence applications and that customers should receive their licence within a few days. If I am misinformed about that, I trust that my hon. Friend will let me know.
I accept that of course there are economic pressures on our country now caused by the factors that we have mentioned, but that is why we have already increased the minimum wage by £1,000 per year for those who are on it, already increased universal credit by £1,000 a year, and all the other measures—billions and billions of tax that we are putting into supporting incomes. The reason we can do that is that we have strong economic fundamentals, with unemployment—I do not know when the hon. Gentleman was born—at the lowest it has been since 1974. That is giving us the foundation to take our country forward.