Debates between Michael Tomlinson and Angela Rayner during the 2017-2019 Parliament

Education Funding

Debate between Michael Tomlinson and Angela Rayner
Tuesday 13th November 2018

(5 years, 6 months ago)

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

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. The Government have, of course, failed to meet their teacher recruitment targets for the past five years and teachers now face a real crisis. The Department for Education told us that the teachers pay grant would cover the cost of the pay rise, but that does not include the first £250 million needed to give staff a 1% pay rise, and the Secretary of State’s own Ministers have admitted that not every school will get the funding it needs through the grant. Will the Secretary of State tell us how many schools are not getting enough to meet the cost? Austerity is not over for our schools.

Michael Tomlinson Portrait Michael Tomlinson (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (Con)
- Hansard - -

A few moments ago the hon. Lady said that record levels of funding were going into our schools. Does she accept that that is a fact?

Angela Rayner Portrait Angela Rayner
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

No. The hon. Gentleman misunderstands what has been said. What I said was that his Government have said that record funding is going into schools, but by not recognising the record costs and additional pupils in our schools they have created a deficit and schools face a real-terms cut. I suggest that the hon. Gentleman look not at my figures but at those of the IFS, which will show him that schools have faced significant cuts, and we know the impact they have.

School Funding

Debate between Michael Tomlinson and Angela Rayner
Wednesday 25th April 2018

(6 years, 1 month ago)

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

I did commend the work of hon. Members across the House to push this issue forward with the Government. The Government have to understand that their manifesto made the commitment that there would be no cuts in cash terms, yet the IFS has already said that there will potentially be cuts of 1.5% to schools. Today’s motion is about holding the Government to account for their promises at the last general election.

Michael Tomlinson Portrait Michael Tomlinson (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (Con)
- Hansard - -

The hon. Lady mentioned cash terms, but spending per pupil under this Government in 2019-20 will be 50% higher in real terms than under Labour in 2000-01. When she talks about cuts, will she look at the evidence and at the real-terms effect of this policy?

Angela Rayner Portrait Angela Rayner
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I say to Government Members that the evidence is clear. Under the last Labour Government, there was a 70% per pupil increase in school budgets. Since 2015, schools have faced cuts. We have heard that time and again from media reports, teachers, parents and leaders of councils of all political persuasions. All of them have said that these cuts are having a detrimental effect. If Government Members want to stick their heads in the sand, that is up to them, but we are trying to hold the Government to account for their promise to give a cash increase to all schools.

Higher Education

Debate between Michael Tomlinson and Angela Rayner
Monday 23rd April 2018

(6 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Michael Tomlinson Portrait Michael Tomlinson (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (Con)
- Hansard - -

What does the hon. Lady say to Universities UK, which says that

“annulment of the statutory instrument is…not in the interest of either universities or students”?

Is this not just another example of Labour playing politics with our students?

Angela Rayner Portrait Angela Rayner
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

This is not about annulling; this is about the Government making sure that legislation is fit for purpose. If the motion is passed tonight, the Government can go away and ensure that the Office for Students is fit for purpose. So far they have only undermined their own legislation, and their behaviour since has only worsened the fears. They seem to believe that education is a commodity to be bought and sold for private gain and not public good. Let me be clear: we fundamentally reject that belief. It is an approach that does not work for individuals or the system as a whole.