(3 weeks, 1 day 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
As a fellow Hull MP, it is a real pleasure to serve under you today, Mr Turner.
I congratulate the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) on securing this important debate. I thank her and all hon. Members who have spoken or intervened for their thoughtful contributions, and of course I also welcome her constituents who are with us today in the Public Gallery.
The hon. Lady made a very powerful case, talking about how a one-size-fits-all approach does not work. She referred to some of her constituents, Bradley, who is volunteering but rightly wants paid work, and Katie, who has to navigate a system that is supposed to help her, but has found that sadly it did not help her at all.
We also heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton South (Mike Reader) about Workbridge. I was really disappointed to hear what he said, and of course I will meet him to discuss what, if anything, I can do to assist. However, we also heard about the very positive example of Nordis Signs, which has been providing careers for people for more than 30 years in some cases. That is excellent.
The hon. Member for Leicester South (Shockat Adam) spoke about the need for businesses to be supported in working with and employing autistic people or other neurodiverse people, and how important that is. The hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon), who spoke for the Liberal Democrats, talked about the importance of getting SEND issues right, and I absolutely agree with him on that. He also talked about Access to Work, which I will make some comments about in a moment.
The hon. Member for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith) spoke for the Conservative party and it was really good to hear from her about Alistair—it is excellent that he now has paid work. However, she was perhaps wearing rose-tinted spectacles when she described what had happened for 14 years under the previous Government and what they had actually achieved.
As the Minister with responsibility for employment, every day I see how good work can transform people’s lives. It gives people purpose, independence, pride and, crucially, a sense of belonging. We have been really clear that we want to achieve an overall 80% employment rate and that that is the key to delivering economic growth and prosperity for all of citizens. To achieve that ambition, we must address low employment rates for disabled people and people with health conditions. Until we do so, disabled people who wish to work will be denied the opportunities to participate fully in society. That has to change.
If we look more closely at the employment prospects of neurodivergent people, the picture worsens. For example, only 34% of autistic people are in any sort of employment, compared with around 55% of disabled people overall. We need to understand the workplace barriers that neurodivergent people face, and the support that employers require to create workplaces that are inclusive for neurodivergent people.
We need to do all this for those people who are currently being denied the opportunity to work and to enjoy all the benefits that we know work can bring. As has been said, there are benefits for employers, who are missing out on a significant source of talent at a time when there are over 700,000 vacancies in the United Kingdom, and there are benefits for our economy, because a more inclusive labour market, with more people in good work, is vital to delivering this Government’s No.1 mission, which is growth.
The hon. Member for Hazel Grove referred to the case of Tom Boyd, which has received quite a lot of media attention and coverage. I will say again that people such as Tom are vital to the UK’s workforce, and volunteering can play a vital role in preparing people for work. I imagine that Waitrose is regretting the way it handled the situation with Tom, and I hope it might consider progressing on its Disability Confident journey, which I will talk about in a moment. It is important to recognise the valuable role of volunteering, and how it can play an important part in getting people ready for paid work, but that should not be at the expense of finding sustainable paid employment for everyone who wants to work. I hope that is something that Waitrose, and all employers, will reflect on.
We want to ensure that neurodivergent people, disabled people and those with long-term health conditions are fully considered and supported to participate and remain in secure, sustained paid employment. That is why we are providing £1 billion to fund the voluntary supported employment programme, Connect to Work, across England and Wales. That will assist up to 300,000 people by the end of this decade. The programme follows internationally recognised evidence to deliver holistic, personalised employment support to disabled people, those with health conditions and others with complex barriers to work. It also works with employers to support participants once they are in work.
At this point, I should also mention that last week I had the great pleasure of meeting Laura Davis from the British Association for Supported Employment. We had a really interesting discussion about the diverse needs of neurodivergent people and the importance of the personalised, inclusive approach that Connect to Work can provide.
On the current offer from the DWP to employers—which I know hon. Members are particularly concerned about —we already have a digital information service that guides employers through workplace scenarios, including supporting neurodivergent employees or employees with learning disabilities. In addition, the DWP oversees the voluntary Disability Confident scheme, which I just referred to in relation to Waitrose. That encourages employers to create disability-inclusive workplaces and to support disabled people to get work and to get on in work. However, we know that there is much more to do, and the DWP is actively engaging with stakeholders to look at how we can best strengthen that scheme.
Some employers are already doing well. Microsoft has a neurodiversity hiring programme, making adjustments to its recruitment processes to be more accessible for neurodivergent people. GCHQ has not only adjusted its recruitment processes, but made specific adjustments in the workplace to help neurodiverse people to thrive. As a Government, we want that to become the norm, not just an example of good practice.
That is why in January this year, we put in place an independent panel of academics with expertise and lived experience of neurodiversity. The panel, led by leading academic expert Professor Amanda Kirby, has been reviewing the existing evidence on neurodiversity in the workplace to consider why neurodivergent people have poor experiences and a low overall employment rate. Part of its work has focused on how employers can better support neurodivergent people in the workplace.
Several hon. Members have referred to the Buckland review. The independent Buckland review on autism employment reported to the previous Government, as we have heard, in February 2024. I agree that it was a valuable piece of work, and my predecessor and the Minister for Social Security and Disability met Sir Robert Buckland last autumn to discuss its findings and to outline our plans to raise awareness of all forms of neurodiversity.
I am really pleased that we have now received the independent expert panel’s findings and recommendations, which we want to consider alongside the Keep Britain Working review. That review, which came out last week and was led by Sir Charlie Mayfield, represents a pivotal moment in our mission to create genuine opportunity for all—fundamentally reshaping how we support people to stay healthy, stay in work and build better futures for themselves and their families. It is about creating a system with greater clarity and support, and where employers feel confident and empowered to act to support their employees to deliver greater productivity. It is also about helping more people to stay and thrive in work throughout their working lives, whatever health conditions or disabilities they may face. We want to work in partnership with employers to create workplaces that support health and wellbeing. We all know that successful businesses and healthy workers go hand in hand.
The hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough, who speaks for the Liberal Democrats, talked at length about Access to Work. That scheme currently supports thousands of disabled people, including people who may have hidden disabilities, to start or stay in work. I do not accept the picture that the hon. Member painted. I do accept that the scheme needs to be looked at, and we have been working directly with disabled people and the organisations that represent them to make improvements to it. I hope to be able to report back on that in due course.
I will seek your guidance, Mr Turner, because I have been speaking for more than 10 minutes now. Is it the case that there is no time limit because we can sit until 6 pm?
Then I will carry on, because there are a few other issues that it might be helpful for hon. Members to be aware of.
Since August this year, there have been the full-time equivalent of more than 1,000 Pathways to Work advisers in our jobcentres across England, Scotland and Wales. I wanted to highlight that because the DWP and Jobcentre Plus committed to making sure that the personalised work advice that we talked about earlier is available to individuals. We also have 700 disability employment advisers and 90 disability employment adviser leaders supporting work coaches, or customers directly, to deliver that holistic and tailored support.
(1 year ago)
Commons ChamberUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
This is the first opportunity I have had to welcome the right hon. Gentleman to his new role as shadow Home Secretary, but I think he might be forgetting a few facts. As I recall, over the previous 14 years, the Conservative Government slashed policing by over 20,000 police officers, and many support staff as well. I acknowledge that the uplift programme was brought in at the end of their period in government, but they got rid of a lot of very experienced, good police officers. Also, just to remind him, we stood for election on a manifesto commitment to providing 13,000 additional police officers, PCSOs and specials as part of our neighbourhood policing guarantee.
I know that the right hon. Gentleman is very keen on technology. That was absolutely one of the things that he focused on. I have certainly taken up some of the issues that he was concerned about to do with live facial recognition, and I want that investment to continue. I think he is again forgetting a few things when he refers to the guidelines for non-crime hate incidents. As I recall, he was the Policing Minister who introduced those guidelines. I have listened to what he said, but I think he needs to remember what he actually did when he was the Policing Minister. I take the approach that this should be about common sense and consistency. His Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary and fire and rescue services talked about the need for consistency and training; I will listen to what it has to say, rather than to the right hon. Gentleman’s view on guidelines that he introduced. Many of the questions that he asks will form part of the consultative approach that we will adopt when our White Paper is laid before Parliament.
My constituents tell me that they are particularly worried about antisocial behaviour, and that they want guaranteed police patrols. Does my right hon. Friend agree that that is what this Government intend to deliver?
I very much welcome that question from my hon. Friend and neighbour in Kingston upon Hull. He is absolutely right to say that the neighbourhood policing guarantee will include designated police officers, PCSOs and specials who will patrol neighbourhoods. There will be a named officer that people can go to if there are problems around antisocial behaviour. We will also bring forward respect orders, which will deal with the people who are engaging most persistently in antisocial behaviour; they can stop them being in particular neighbourhoods or even put conditions on them—for example, if they have an alcohol problem, they may have to get treatment and help for that problem. But he is absolutely right to say that antisocial behaviour is a big issue for many of our constituents.
(13 years, 8 months ago)
Commons ChamberI am pleased to have secured this very important debate on the effect of the reductions in legal aid on legal aid providers. I refer Members to the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, as I was a practising lawyer before my election to this House. As a criminal lawyer, I relied on the public purse for much of my income.
The Lord Chancellor offered up 23% cuts without any fight and blindly conceded to the Treasury’s demands without looking at the real impact on justice and legal aid providers. The Government’s own impact assessment states:
“The lack of a robust evidence base means that we are unable to draw conclusions as to whether wider economic and social costs are likely to result from the programme of reform or to estimate their size.”
I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this important debate. As a fellow Hull MP, he will know the importance of citizens advice bureaux and community legal advice centres in providing legal help and advice and of the genuine concern out there that people will not have access to good-quality legal advice. I am sure that he shares the concerns of many people in Hull.
Absolutely. My hon. Friend makes an important point. As I understand it, 97% of funding to the—