Paediatric First Aid

Jonathan Reynolds Excerpts

Monday 15th December 2014 Westminster Hall

[Mark Hunter]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. He was one of the Members who referred to the rising number of children in nursery schools, which is why this debate is particularly pertinent and topical. More and more people are looking to avail themselves of the opportunity to place their children in nurseries. The Department for Education’s child care and early years providers survey in 2013, which was published in September, revealed that the number of registered places in full day care settings rose by 10% between 2011 and 2013. Due to the introduction of funded provision for disadvantaged two-years-olds, there was a whacking 72% increase between 2011 and 2013 in the number of two-year-olds attending sessional settings in the 30% most deprived areas. This debate is on a huge issue that potentially affects an awful lot of people.

As demand increases, supply rises to meet that demand. As new nursery places are provided, we have a duty to ensure that all children are safe and that all staff are well trained. None of us here will need reminding that children younger than one are extremely vulnerable and need constant care and attention. In the rush for nursery places and with the subsequent waiting lists, I firmly believe that parents are making an assumption that all nursery staff are adequately trained in how to provide the appropriate paediatric first aid, but we now know that that is sadly not always the case.

As an aside, hon. Members may be interested to know that I recently inquired about the provision of training here in Westminster, at Parliament’s nursery. The answer is that all relevant staff are trained in paediatric first aid. If it is good enough for the children of Members and House staff, it ought to be good enough for every child attending nursery anywhere in the country.

[Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op)]

I am extremely grateful to the hon. Gentleman for securing the debate. As is evidenced by the attendance today, the campaign has generated huge interest—particularly, for understandable reasons, in Greater Manchester. I was aware of the case, but not of the policy background, which the hon. Gentleman has described. I simply want to indicate my support for the campaign and for the hon. Gentleman’s speech.

[Mark Hunter]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. I am sure that everyone involved in the Millie’s Trust campaign will be heartened by the interest shown by hon. Members from right across the House, including the hon. Gentleman.

During the inquest into Millie Thompson’s death in December 2013, the coroner, John Pollard, said:

“It is of national importance that the legislation surrounding nurseries regarding paediatric first aid is reviewed.”

He also recommended that the North West Ambulance Service review some of its policies, including what paediatric equipment each ambulance should carry. I am pleased to report that, since the inquest, it has successfully carried out that review. The coroner has said that the issue is of national importance and called for the policies around paediatric first aid treatment in nurseries to be reviewed, so I hope that the Minister will take that on board.

The North West Ambulance Service has gone further by introducing a minimum requirement list of paediatric equipment that every ambulance must now carry. The service’s urgent review and subsequent changes have ensured that any errors made in how it reacted to the 999 call regarding Millie Thompson will not be repeated. It has taken seriously what the coroner advised, and Millie’s death has had a positive outcome that will help other children in future. We acknowledge that the Department for Education deals with a wider remit than that of the North West Ambulance Service, but it is disappointing that we have seen action from the ambulance service on the coroner’s recommendations, but none as yet—although we live in hope—from the Government.

Following Millie’s tragic passing, the Thompsons decided to set up a charity to provide paediatric first aid training to anyone who wants to learn. They have successfully built what is now a national charity in just two years. It provides free training to parents and hugely discounted qualifications to anyone who needs paediatric first aid training, which is what Ofsted requests. Over the past two years, the charity has trained about 7,000 people, many of whom are nursery nurses. Millie’s Trust is a registered centre through Qualsafe, which is an Ofqual-recognised awarding body organisation.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jonathan Reynolds Excerpts

Thursday 5th December 2013 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (Jo Swinson)]

My hon. Friend is right. That is one of the reasons why my right hon. Friend the Business Secretary asked the Low Pay Commission to identify the conditions that are necessary for an increase in the minimum wage. I think that we would all like wages to increase: things have been very difficult for households over the last few years following the economic crisis, and encouraging businesses to pay good wages encourages staff loyalty, motivation and productivity. It is, of course, important to balance that with the fear of unemployment, which we want to keep down.

[Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op)]

T2. On Monday the Government announced substantial changes in the ECO energy efficiency scheme, including significant scaling back of the component that insulates solid walls. Most of the large-scale local authority and social landlord energy efficiency schemes depend on that component, and there will obviously be a correspondingly negative impact on the insulation industry. What discussions is the Department having with the industry about the likely number of job losses, and what are they doing to mitigate it?

[The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (Michael Fallon)]

I do not recognise the impact that the hon. Gentleman suggests. The energy company obligation scheme is being extended over a further two years, until 2015, and it is being focused better on those households that need it most.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jonathan Reynolds Excerpts

Monday 11th November 2013 Commons Chamber

[Mr Timpson]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his co-operative spirit on this issue. It is important that Parliament and Government give a single, clear message on ensuring that all children with SEN get the support that they need and deserve. I am aware of a number of concerns that have been raised, by parents and others working with children with SEN, during the passage of the Children and Families Bill. The important thing to remember is that we are not reducing or diluting any of the existing protections or rights. In fact, we are expanding them in many cases, particularly for those young people over the age of 16. We will continue to work on some of the remaining issues as the Bill continues its passage through the other place.

[Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op)]

8. What steps he is taking to ensure there is sufficient supply of child care places for the 40% most disadvantaged two-year-olds.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Elizabeth Truss)]

After only one month of the programme being available, local authorities have reported to us that 92,000 two-year-olds have received an early education place. That is well on the way to our ultimate goal. In fact, it is 70% of it, which is a tremendous achievement by the local authorities and child care providers that participated. We are doing more work to make sure that childminders, nurseries and school nurseries are able to offer places for next year’s expansion.

[Jonathan Reynolds]

I thank the Minister for that answer, but is it not the case that the latest figures produced by her own Department suggest that the take-up of the offer for two-year-olds has been lower than intended? This is a flagship policy of the Government, so will the Minister confirm whether she is satisfied with the information that she has just given us, or will she try to make the programme work even better?

[Elizabeth Truss]

I think that 92,000 places is a fantastic achievement for local authorities. There are disparities across the country, and we are working with local authorities that are behind. I am pleased to tell the hon. Gentleman that 400 two-year-olds have places in his local area of Tameside. We are doing more to ensure that childminders can offer places. All good and outstanding childminders will be able to offer places from this September.

Qualified Teachers

Jonathan Reynolds Excerpts

Wednesday 30th October 2013 Commons Chamber

[Michael Gove]

The Chairman of the Select Committee is right once again. This is a policy for generating unemployment for excellent teachers in the state sector and giving the wealthy—those who have the advantage of the cash that enables them to pay for an independent education—the freedom to benefit from them. It is also important to recognise that the freedom to employ whoever a head teacher believes to be important and capable of adding value to education is essential to the academies and free schools programme.

It is important that Opposition Members are not selective in their use of evidence when they talk about academies and free schools, because academic results are improving faster in sponsored academies than in other schools, and the longer schools have enjoyed academy freedoms, the better they have done. In sponsored academies, open for three years and taking advantage of the freedoms we have given them, the proportion of pupils who achieve five good GCSEs including English and maths has increased by an average of 12.1 percentage points. Over the same time, results in all state-funded schools have gone up, which is good, but only by 5.1 percentage points.

We are clearly seeing academies and free schools generating improved results for the students who need them most. More than that, free schools, overwhelmingly in the poorest areas, have been backed by Andrew Adonis and Tony Blair. Andrew Adonis said that free schools were essentially Labour’s invention and Tony Blair, the former Prime Minister, backed them, saying that they were a great idea, explicitly because they were

“independent schools in the state sector”.

He backed them because they had all the freedoms of great independent schools, like University College school and others, to do the right thing for their students.

[Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op)]

Not for the first time, there is a lack of logic in what the Secretary of State is saying. If unqualified teachers are doing such a good job and are so able, why would they find it so hard to achieve formal qualifications?

[Michael Gove]

If they are doing such a good job, why would the hon. Gentleman want to see them sacked? As far as he and those on his Front Bench are concerned, the only way in which someone can be a good teacher is if a single piece of paper is conferred on them. We believe that the right person to decide who should teach in a school is the head teacher, not the bureaucrats.

Another point that it is important to remember—I shall be explicit about this point, which was hinted at by the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central—is that there is a difference of opinion between the two coalition parties about the future of the policy on academies and free schools. It has been a success so far, one in which we share, and I pay tribute to the Liberal Democrats for supporting it.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jonathan Reynolds Excerpts

Thursday 24th October 2013 Commons Chamber

[Jo Swinson]

The universal service is particularly valuable to rural areas, where it can be a lifeline. That is why it is important for it to be entrenched in the Postal Services Act 2011. For other postal services such as access to posting parcels and so on, the Government have promised to ensure that we maintain the network of more than 11,500 post offices. That is in stark contrast to the closure of thousands of post offices across the country by the previous Government, including in rural areas. We are ensuring that people across the country have good access to postal services.

[Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op)]

10. What representations he has received from manufacturers on the case for continued UK membership of the EU with regard to their business and investment plans.

[The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (Vince Cable)]

Ministers and the Department frequently receive representations from manufacturers, and others, in support of continued UK membership of the European Union and the single market. A recent example is the report by the Engineering Employers Federation, “Manufacturing: Our future in Europe”.

[Jonathan Reynolds]

Manufacturing is vital to my constituency, the country, and to increasing exports and getting our economy back on stronger ground. Does the Secretary of State agree that the constant doubts cast over our relationship with the EU by Members of his Government are harmful to our manufacturing industry, which wants certainty so that we can invest and grow for the future?

Oral Answers to Questions

Jonathan Reynolds Excerpts

Thursday 18th July 2013 Commons Chamber

[Matthew Hancock]

We are delivering the new traineeships from next month. Given the need, after years of inaction, to bring together support for work experience and skills for those approaching the job market, I would have thought that the hon. Gentleman would welcome that. I would have thought that the Opposition would have supported the rise in the number of apprenticeships to record levels since the election.

[Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op)]

10. What the outcomes were of his Department’s summit meeting with payday lenders on 1 July 2013; and if he will make a statement.

[Ann McKechin (Glasgow North) (Lab)]

11. What the outcomes were of his Department’s summit meeting with payday lenders on 1 July 2013; and if he will make a statement.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (Jo Swinson)]

The Government’s payday lending summit provided an excellent opportunity to deliver a strong message to the payday industry to get its house in order. It focused particularly on the Financial Conduct Authority’s priorities for reducing consumer harm when it becomes the regulator in April, ahead of its consultation on its credit rulebook this September.

[Jonathan Reynolds]

I welcome the Minister’s answer and the summit, but let us be honest—the Government have consistently ducked clamping down on predatory pricing and extortionate interest charges, despite the amendment secured last year in the House of Lords that gives the regulators the ability to control costs and loan duration. Notwithstanding the spin of holding a payday lenders summit, when is the Minister going to promise to act so that families across the country can be protected from these predatory activities?

[Jo Swinson]

Significant action is being taken. The Office of Fair Trading has referred the industry to the Competition Commission because of widespread non-compliance. It is taking its own enforcement action, which has already resulted in a third of the lenders that have responded so far—the rest are due to do so this month—leaving the market altogether as a result of the tough action being taken. We have given the FCA stronger powers to enable it to ban products, impose unlimited fines and order money to be paid back to consumers who have been ripped off. That is a pretty comprehensive package of action to clamp down on this unscrupulous and irresponsible lending behaviour.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jonathan Reynolds Excerpts

Monday 24th June 2013 Commons Chamber

[Michael Gove]

I am terribly sorry, but I think that someone who makes a mistake and is happy to correct the record is in a rather better position than someone who attempts to belittle in a sexist fashion an honourable Minister.

[Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op)]

T9. Teachers in my constituency tell me that teaching assistants make a huge contribution to their schools. Their work not only means that teachers have more time to teach, but has a big impact on things such as attendance and student discipline. In the light of recent press speculation, will the Secretary of State put on the record his support for teaching assistants and pledge to keep them in our schools?

[Michael Gove]

Delighted.

Careers Advice in Schools

Jonathan Reynolds Excerpts

Monday 24th June 2013 Commons Chamber

[Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op)]

Thank you for calling me to speak in this important debate, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Burnley (Gordon Birtwistle), who should be commended for securing the debate. Like him, my interest in these matters stems principally from my role in supporting manufacturing in Parliament, and from the feedback that he and I have received from our meetings on that subject.

In the current economic climate, in which all sides agree that youth unemployment is still unacceptably high, it follows that the issue we are discussing is of paramount importance. Governments of any political make-up have a duty of care to ensure that young people are given the best possible opportunities. Careers advice in the UK, however, is extremely patchy and often of poor quality, and frequently both. The problem has not been improved by some of the reforms that the Government have introduced.

In the short time available, my aim is to outline the two main areas where I feel careers advice is suffering: first, the fundamental lack of consistency in the offer of careers guidance to students up and down the country; and, secondly, the concerns that I and, I know, many employers have about the quality and standard of careers guidance as it relates to the needs of our economy. I will conclude by offering suggestions about what the Government could do to reverse this worrying trend.

The first area where I believe problems of careers advice lie is the fact that it is often not delivered. One of the conclusions in the Education Committee’s report, “Careers guidance for young people: the impact of the new duty on schools”, published earlier this year, was:

“The Government’s decision to transfer responsibility for careers guidance to schools is regrettable...this has led, predictably, to a drop in the overall level of provision.”

I understand that more than eight out of 10 schools across the country have reduced the careers advice provided to pupils, and that dedicated careers services have frequently been axed.

In my borough of Tameside, where my constituency is based, Government cuts to local authority budgets have meant that careers advice and guidance services for young people have been fundamentally slashed—first by 65%, and then a year later by a further 50%. The effects are already becoming clear, as a recent study by the Education and Employers Taskforce showed: 12 to 16-year-olds have widely mismatched job ambitions, with a clear lack of understanding of what jobs are out there, of how to get them, and of the pay and expectations that go with them.

It is clear that this transfer of responsibility has exacerbated a postcode lottery in careers advice, which the Government appear to acknowledge in their response to the Select Committee report, by accepting

“that some schools are still adjusting to their responsibilities under the new duty”.

The question we must ask tonight is whether pupils are getting the information they need to make informed career choices. The evidence at the moment says that they are not. This has to change.

My second point is about the quality and standard of careers advice, particularly with regard to the needs of employers. As a vice-chair of the associate parliamentary manufacturing group, I hear from many manufacturing companies that feel that young people have little or no understanding of their sector or their employability needs. Those points were vividly illustrated by the hon. Member for Burnley. Only recently, John Cridland told the Government that careers advice is on “life support”, and that not enough was being done to help youngsters in a rapidly changing job market.

It is important to remember that both pupils and employers suffer. A CBI report recently found that employers felt 55% of school leavers lacked the right work experience, with this being a real problem in the manufacturing industry—an industry that I and many colleagues believe is absolutely vital to this country’s economy.

[Mark Menzies (Fylde) (Con)]

The hon. Gentleman is making some powerful points. Like me, he is passionate about manufacturing. I would like to hear what he would suggest the Government do to bridge the gap between the needs of young people and the needs of employers. With BAE Systems in my constituency, I am passionate about that subject.

[Jonathan Reynolds]

I would like to see a number of specific things applied to all aspects of career advice. In manufacturing, one of the principal things to change is the perception. I find it incredible that some people still believe that manufacturing is somehow a dirty industry and not the high-tech example that we see in BAE Systems. Challenging gender stereotypes is another highly important issue for manufacturing. What may be harder to achieve is getting it across to people that while BAE Systems and similar companies are important, it is the associated supply chain that really generates the wealth and the opportunity for jobs. My constituency predominantly has companies of that sort; it would be valuable if we could get more information out about the success of those companies, particularly in export markets where many are doing very well relative to the rest of the economy.

I am pleased that the Government have said in response to the Select Committee’s report:

“Good careers advice should be informed by labour market intelligence…grounded in the realistic context of the needs of today’s employers”.

I also welcome the commitment that there will be a

“strengthening of the relationship between the National Careers Service and Local Enterprise Partnerships.”

However, more action is needed to support such overarching themes and changes. The Government have said that in carrying out the new duties, schools are expected to work in partnership with employers as appropriate. What direct, on-the-ground support does the Minister envisage will be made available to schools to allow that to happen?

In an economic climate in which jobs are already scarce, careers guidance for 12 to 16-year-olds appears to be in emergency care. We often hear about the danger of a lost generation, and the not in education, employment or training figures are unacceptably high. Therefore, high-quality and readily available careers advice, appropriately matched to the needs of our economy, is absolutely vital. All is not lost, however; the Government can do a lot to remedy the situation. They do appear to be listening, and they have accepted that there is more to do, particularly in helping local authorities meet their statutory needs. A more fundamental change of attitude is needed, however, so that careers advice is not seen as an afterthought, but is at the heart of a child’s education—I agreed with the Minister’s heckle on the hon. Member for Burnley, that such advice must begin earlier than the age of 12.

Schools need more help—both financial help and guidance—from the Government, but it does not necessarily have to be at high cost. Crucially, to raise standards and quality across the board, I believe Ofsted should inspect careers advice in schools. I know that Ofsted has requested that, and the Government are currently reviewing it.

I hope the Government listen carefully to all that is said in this important debate. I hope that they take on board some of the constructive suggestions, which I hope they will hear. We all want a system that meets both the Government’s objectives and the needs of the employers in our constituencies, and I hope the Government will bring forward further plans to help promote that.

Children and Families Bill

Jonathan Reynolds Excerpts

Tuesday 11th June 2013 Commons Chamber

Amendment 46 relates to accountability for the local offer, which is one of the cornerstones of the Bill. That has to mean something for families and young people, so the question of accountability is key.

[Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op)]

This is a particularly important amendment, among the many that the hon. Gentleman has mentioned. I strongly agree that this duty is extremely important in making the local offer meaningful. I hope the Government will listen to the support for the duty, as well as to the representations that I am sure will be made in the other place. In making this contribution, I draw the attention of the House to my declaration of interest.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jonathan Reynolds Excerpts

Thursday 21st March 2013 Commons Chamber

[Jo Swinson]

The hon. Gentleman ingeniously uses the question to highlight a local issue. It is obviously up to local authorities to make their own decisions, but he uses this opportunity to put his views firmly on the record. No doubt his colleagues on the council will look closely at his comments.

[Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op)]

16. What progress he made on the adoption of an industrial strategy for the UK.

[The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (Vince Cable)]

We are developing long-term partnerships with business across a variety of sectors and policy areas. On Monday, I announced £1.6 billion of new Government funding over the next 10 years—well beyond this Parliament—to back our industrial strategy, concentrating initially on aerospace, automotives and agri-food.

[Jonathan Reynolds]

In recent weeks, the former director general of the Institute of Directors, Sir George Cox, in his excellent review of tackling short-termism in the British economy, added his voice to the call for a proper industrial strategy to support long-term growth. Since he took office and abandoned much of what the last Labour Government were doing, the Secretary of State has delivered many good speeches on delivering an industrial strategy, but we do not yet seem to have one. When will we get this sorted?

[Vince Cable]

We already have one. We are reversing much of the damage done with the decline of manufacturing industry under the Labour Government. I applaud the George Cox study. It follows, and in many ways echoes, the survey of long-termism and short-termism that I did through Professor John Kay.