All 3 Debates between Angela Rayner and Caroline Dinenage

Local Government Reorganisation

Debate between Angela Rayner and Caroline Dinenage
Monday 7th September 2026

(2 weeks, 1 day ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Angela Rayner Portrait Angela Rayner
- View Speech - Hansard - -

I considered the legal advice provided as part of the judicial review process, and the decision to withdraw the decision reflected updated legal clarity. It is a long-standing principle that the Government do not publish or comment on legal advice. I have been clear that I want to be able to review these decisions to ensure, as the new Secretary of State, that they are the right ones. We will consider the programme in the round in the light of the Government’s priorities, as set out in “Rewiring the State”, and Ministers will meet with Members of this House and will set out decisions at our earliest opportunity.

Caroline Dinenage Portrait Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for her statement, but I have to confess to being a bit more confused now than I was when I walked into the room. When it comes to Hampshire, is this a pause or a cancellation? When will we know whether this titanic waste of council taxpayers’ money will re-emerge? The Government’s top-down reorganisation plans have cost councils across Hampshire so much time and money, at a point when finances are already stretched to breaking point. Has she calculated the cost? Will local authorities be reimbursed for the time and money already spent? When will we know what is in the plan?

Angela Rayner Portrait Angela Rayner
- View Speech - Hansard - -

Again, I said that we would work at pace, but I want to be able to review these decisions to ensure that they are the right ones, respecting the court process. That means the way to do this is to withdraw and consider afresh. On the costs so far, I recognise that a lot of work has gone into the financial commitments that have been made. I say to the hon. Member that this work is not wasted, and the Government have committed to providing transitional funding.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Angela Rayner and Caroline Dinenage
Monday 19th December 2016

(9 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Caroline Dinenage Portrait Caroline Dinenage
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. I was at Sheringham Nursery School in Newham last week, which is an early implementer and is already seeing the massive difference the scheme is making to working families. There is an inclusion fund that will go to children with special educational needs and disabilities.

Angela Rayner Portrait Angela Rayner (Ashton-under-Lyne) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

I hope the Minister agrees that the early-years pupil premium provides vital support to some of our most disadvantaged children. Like the hon. Member for High Peak (Andrew Bingham), we know that nurseries are facing financial pressure now, and many worry that they will not be able to care for the most vulnerable children when the 30 hours scheme is introduced. Will she therefore guarantee that all of the ÂŁ50 million early-years pupil premium money will go to our most vulnerable children, and that that vital resource will not be cut this Parliament?

Caroline Dinenage Portrait Caroline Dinenage
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Yes. The pupil premium, which we introduced, will continue and will continue to go to the most vulnerable children.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Angela Rayner and Caroline Dinenage
Thursday 2nd July 2015

(11 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Caroline Dinenage Portrait Caroline Dinenage
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend speaks about an emotive subject, but the law changed last October and now requires the family court to presume that each parent’s involvement will further the child’s welfare unless there is evidence to the contrary. However, the child’s welfare remains a paramount consideration for the court. Where either parent breaches a child arrangements order without a reasonable excuse, the court has the power to deal with it, including by imposing community sentences or even by treating the breach as a contempt of court, punishable by imprisonment or a fine.

Angela Rayner Portrait Angela Rayner (Ashton-under-Lyne) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

27. What discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Justice on reviewing the eligibility test that victims of domestic violence must pass to obtain legal aid.

Caroline Dinenage Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Women and Equalities and Family Justice (Caroline Dinenage)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Tackling domestic violence is a core priority for the Government. Following an early review of the system, we introduced a number of changes to make it easier for victims to gain access to legal aid. They include making acceptable forms of evidence such as domestic violence protection orders, and making existing forms of evidence easier to acquire.

Angela Rayner Portrait Angela Rayner
- Hansard - -

When criminal justice agencies fail to respond appropriately to domestic and sexual violence, women pay with their lives. What is the Government’s response to the inquiry conducted by the all-party parliamentary group on domestic and sexual violence, which established that 89% of experts had found that women did not have access to justice? Were those experts wrong?

Caroline Dinenage Portrait Caroline Dinenage
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I shall be happy to give the hon. Lady a full response in writing, but I can tell her that the number of convictions has risen to its highest ever level under this Government. We will be reviewing the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, which transformed the legal aid landscape, and, as my right hon. Friend the Justice Secretary said last week, we will ensure that the very richest in our legal aid system do a little bit more.