Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Lauren Sullivan Excerpts

Wednesday 8th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Laura Trott]

My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. To be clear, the Bill proposes a pay cut for nearly 20,000 teachers in future years, because it imposes national terms and conditions on teachers in academies. I have to ask: what problem are the Government trying to solve? Teachers outside of national pay scales are paid more, not less. What have they got against highly paid teachers? Why on earth are the Government coming here today and telling tens of thousands of teachers that their pay is too high? It is absurd. Levelling down seems to be this Government’s priority. The flexibilities given on terms and conditions allow academies to offer things such as a longer school day. Are the Labour Government proposing to ban that?

The explanatory notes to the Bill set a new standard in double speak when they praise the

“positive innovation and good practice in teachers’ pay and conditions in some academies”

and say that the Government want to

“ensure that local authority-maintained schools also have the opportunity to implement this”.

So what are they doing? Are they giving these same pay flexibilities to local authority schools? They are doing opposite. They are taking pay flexibilities away from academies. Do not try and make any sense of this, because it is impossible. It is entirely contradictory.

The Government are also removing the requirement for failing schools to be taken over by an academy, despite recognising the

“strong track record of multi academy trusts…turning around failing schools”.

What are they replacing it with? They mention

“regional improvement for standards and excellence (‘RISE’) teams”—

officials sitting in the Department for Education—but in another breath they said that those teams will not be involved in failing schools.

The Government have clearly totally failed; they do not understand that the reason that failing schools became academies by default is that it is the most effective intervention. If it is not mandatory, there will be lots of massive rows about what will happen to failing schools, and inevitable delays and legal challenges. What is the upshot? More time with children in failing schools not being dealt with. What is their plan for failing schools? What is their plan to protect those children from falling behind? What is the evidence that this approach is better? Have they trialled it anywhere? Why on earth are they putting this into a Bill without a clear alternative failure regime in place that evidence shows is at least as good?

The Bill is totally unacceptable and misunderstands why the academy order has been so important. I cannot say this strongly enough to the Government Benches: it needs to change.

[Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)]

Will the right hon. Lady concede that the academisation process has meant that the off-rolling that we have seen up and down this country has led to the crisis in SEND? That is the whole point of how the academy system has, apparently, improved standards. It has not—it has decreased inclusion. Will she please show us how the academy system has helped our children who are now stuck at home because they have been off-rolled?

[Laura Trott]

I am glad that the hon. Lady has confirmed that the Labour party is, indeed, anti-academy.

The Bill goes on and on—rampant centralisation in search of a cause. Why are the Government making all schools follow the national curriculum? Where is the evidence that there is a problem? Why are they putting in place sweeping powers to direct academies on unspecified things? What possible justification do they have for that? The notes say that it is to prevent “unreasonable use of power”. I say, look in the mirror.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Lauren Sullivan]

Will the shadow Minister give way?

[Neil O’Brien]

I am pressed for time, so I will see if I can get to the hon. Lady at the end.

Our amendment is also the first opportunity that MPs will have during the Bill’s proceedings to vote for a proper national inquiry into the grooming gangs. As the Bill goes through, we will seek to make further amendments to ensure that this much-needed inquiry happens. The current discussion started when Oldham asked for a national inquiry into what happened there. It did so because a local inquiry would not have the powers needed: it cannot summon witnesses, cannot take evidence under oath and cannot requisition evidence. We have already seen the two men who led the Greater Manchester local investigation resign because they were being blocked, yet the Government say no to a national inquiry and say that there should instead be local inquiries. But there have been years over which they should have happened, and they have not happened.

In many cases, the local officials are part of the problem and even part of the cover-up, so they cannot be the people to fix this. [Interruption.] Members are chuntering from a sedentary position, but take, for example, the case of Keighley, where my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) has been calling for an inquiry for years. [Interruption.] Last night, while Ministers were here saying that there should be a local inquiry, in Keighley they were blocking a local inquiry—even as they spoke. So that is not the answer.

The Government hide behind the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse. It was an important first step, but what it was not and never intended to be was a report on the grooming gangs. It barely touches on them. It looked at half a dozen—just half a dozen—places where grooming gangs have operated, but there were 40 to 50 places where grooming gangs operated ,and the voices of the victims in those places have never been heard. [Interruption.] Having a proper national inquiry does not stop anyone getting on and implementing the recommendations of the Jay report. Indeed, one of the recommendations of the Jay report, recommendation 4, is to increase public awareness. Without a national inquiry, it is clear that we will not get to the bottom of this issue and that the people who looked the other way or covered up will not be held to account. So far, how many people in authority have been brought to justice or held to account? The answer is zero. [Interruption.] Tonight, we have a chance to change that.

Education and Opportunity

Lauren Sullivan Excerpts

Wednesday 24th July 2024 Commons Chamber

[Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)]

Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker, and may I congratulate you on your new post and wish you very well? I pay tribute to the excellent speech made by my hon. Friend the Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire South (Johanna Baxter); she may be small, but incredibly mighty things will come from her standing up for her constituency. I offer my deepest sympathies to my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden), and say to him, “Your mum would be so proud, and you moved many people in this Chamber today.”

I also welcome my new colleagues from Kent, my hon. Friends the Members for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan) and for Dartford (Jim Dickson), to their seats in Parliament. They spoke with passion about their constituencies and I look forward to working with each and every one of the Members who have made their maiden speeches today, and Members across the Chamber.

I begin by thanking the residents of my Gravesham constituency for putting their faith in me. I will work to the very best of my abilities to raise their concerns and issues in this House. I also pay tribute to the Member for Gravesham who served before me, Adam Holloway. Adam served the residents of Gravesham for 19 years and he and his office provided much support, advice and guidance to a range of constituents over those many years. I will seek to enhance and build on that work by holding surgeries and having an office in the borough to fulfil my promise of being an accessible MP. We may have disagreed on much, as hon. Members would expect, but, as a former soldier, Adam served his country, and his dedication in this House to those who serve is something I wholeheartedly support and will continue to champion.

Gravesham is a great place, encompassing the towns of Northfleet and Gravesend, which are bound by the River Thames to the north, 20 miles that way. They are surrounded by the beautiful rural villages of Meopham, Higham, Istead Rise, Shorne, Cobham, Sole Street, Luddesdown, Culverstone, Harvel and Vigo. We have a blend of manufacturing and industry close to the river, such as refined metals and paper making, and farming and agriculture.

We are proud to have not only one of Europe’s largest—if not the largest—gurdwaras, but two gurdwaras in Gravesham, and I commend and pay tribute to the incredible voluntary work they did before, during and after the covid pandemic. For many communities during covid, we saw a coming together, whether in churches, mosques, temples or other voluntary organisations. We saw the very best of people, and I am proud to represent a diverse constituency of many faiths and cultures.

I recall the recent celebrations of the Windrush generation, whose relatives docked across the river—they cannot get there at the moment because the Tilbury ferry is down, but we are working on that. They have enhanced our borough and they chose Gravesend and Gravesham for their home. One such legendary woman was Sister Ursula Sullivan, also known as Sully, who is known for having birthed and cared for most of the population in my constituency, including my husband.

Gravesham has a rich history dating back to before the Roman settlers. I pay tribute to the Gravesend Historical Society—100 years old today—and to Christoph Bull, Victor Smith, Sandra Soder and many others for documenting our proud history, as has been done since the Domesday Book. One of Gravesend’s claims to fame is that it is the final resting place of the native American princess Pocahontas, or Rebecca Rolfe, as she was known later in life. A fictionalised story of her early life was immortalised in a famous Disney animated movie, in which Pocahontas was not only a Disney princess, but a strong female leader. That is a part of Gravesham, and as the first woman MP for Gravesham, I can draw on her for inspiration. However, I can assure the House that, while I admire the strong female role models that Disney provides, such as Mulan, Merida from “Brave” or even Elsa, I am no Disney princess. Certainly nobody in this Chamber would want to hear me sing—so, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will just let it go.

There is so much to admire about Gravesham, but there is also much to admire about Labour’s plan for education and opportunity, so I will turn back to the subject of the debate. I welcome the Secretary of State and Ministers to their positions. Having campaigned alongside many of them, I know their passion for all our young people and children.

As well as being a scientist working on neglected tropical diseases under the supervision of regius professor Michael Ferguson at the University of Dundee—particularly African sleeping sickness, or trypanosomiasis, which is transmitted by the tsetse fly—and having worked more recently on malaria with Jean Langhorne at the Francis Crick Institute in London, supported by a brilliant Daphne Jackson fellowship, which returns its fellows to science after a break, I am also a qualified secondary school science teacher. I know full well that lessons should instil the excitement and inspiration needed for young people to choose to pursue a scientific career—one that our nation’s growth depends on —so I welcome the proposed modernisation of the curriculum, and especially the curriculum for life. So many of our young people in Gravesham tell me that they do not feel that the current school curriculum prepares them for life’s many challenges.

Although my children attend a great state school, the stress and pressure of the system, and the constant testing even at primary school, is leaving less time for play, creativity and socialisation. At times, our education system seems focused on evidencing for Ofsted’s needs rather than on the education and wellbeing of children—especially those with special educational needs. Academic achievement is important, but we must ensure that our young people are included in an education system that leaves them well-rounded and ready for life with practical skills. A fully equipped, statutory, universal and open-access youth work system will be vital to achieve that aim.

I thank the residents of Gravesham, my wonderful campaign team, and my family, who are with me today—and have behaved incredibly well! [Interruption.] I would not be here without their love and support.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call Peter Swallow to make his maiden speech.