Post-16 Education and Skills Strategy
Nusrat Ghani Excerpts(1 week, 1 day ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)
With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement to update the House on the Government’s work to transform further and higher education in this country.
The House should be in no doubt: transformation is what we need, because the world is changing, with artificial intelligence, machine learning, green energy and new and exciting technologies. Global forces are reshaping the world of work more and more quickly. They bring fresh and exciting chances for growth and opportunity. However, unless education and training in this country also change, we risk missing those chances and our young people risk being left behind.
We have seen that before. Under the previous Government, who thought that colleges and technical education were for other people’s children, apprenticeship starts for our young people plummeted. They talked down our universities and were more interested in headlines for culture wars than in head-starts for students. We will never take that path. I know that Members on both sides of the House will agree that we in this country have a duty—to our people, to our businesses and to our great history—not just to keep up but to lead the way.
Today we publish our post-16 education and skills White Paper to seize the opportunities of this changing world, to deliver growth for our economy and opportunity for our communities, and to lead the way. My vision for post-16 education in this country is a skills system that drives growth and is more balanced, more responsive and more reflective of the evolving world of work. It will add dynamism, invention and expertise to our economy, and it will go further by inviting working people to be part of that economic strength and to add to and share in that success.
The young person who has just left school and is not sure of what is next deserves a range of quality options to choose the route that is right for him—a great apprenticeship, a top course at his local further education college, or to go off to university. A working mother deserves the opportunity to upskill and make the most of her talents. For her, it means more than a job; it means a career, security and opportunity. I want to see that opportunity cascade into our communities, with local businesses becoming more productive, taking on more people and paying higher salaries; hustle and bustle returning to the high street; the skilled workforce that we need to build more local homes; and empowered NHS staff with the right skills to deliver a transformed service that is fit for the future—getting this country moving again.
That is why the skills system is fundamental to national renewal. The White Paper is the turning point in how we go from a quarter of a million skilled vacancies sitting unfilled to a pipeline of top-quality training to fill those jobs and create new ones, from a muddle of confusing pathways to a coherent system meeting the needs of the modern economy, and from further education treated as the poor relation to our colleges standing side by side with our world-class universities.
The public will have heard such warm words about skills before, and they will know that warm words often fizzle out into nothing—no action and no change. But that is no longer the case, because our reform of the skills system has already begun. We have established Skills England, reformed the growth and skills levy, slashed red tape on apprenticeships, introduced technical excellence colleges and stabilised university finances, and we are rolling out the youth guarantee.
Today, we are going further, guided by our industrial strategy. We will fill gaps and meet needs, through our new foundation apprenticeships or through shorter courses in priority sectors, which from April will be funded by the growth and skills levy. To deliver growth, we are investing £187 million for our “Techfirst” digital skills and AI learning, £182 million for engineering, £182 million for the defence talent pipeline and £625 million to train 60,000 more construction workers. That is all backed up by 29 new technical excellence colleges.
Clean energy, defence, digital, advanced manufacturing, construction—what we need is technical excellence, and that is what our colleges can provide. Through this White Paper we will work with our fantastic FE staff. We will draw on their passion and expertise. We are strengthening professional development in our colleges, partnering with industry, and building on the evidence of what works. We will pair that support with improved performance measures, to bring our colleges out of the shadow of the university route, and to make it a pathway of equal importance, equal value, and equal pride in the eyes of the nation. As the Prime Minister has said, that will be a defining cause for this Labour Government: no longer a Cinderella service, but rather a system of high esteem, matching high support with high challenge, and spreading best practice from across the country to deliver high standards in every college. To seize the opportunities of the tech revolution, this country needs not just lawyers, economists, and scientists; we need wind turbine technicians, video editors, and builders—careers that we on this side of the House respect, and work that pays and lifts up communities.
We are introducing rigorous study pathways, giving young people a clear line of sight into great careers. That includes V-levels, the brand new vocational pathway unveiled in our White Paper today, sitting proudly alongside A-levels and T-levels, and building the skills and knowledge that employers value. We are backing those changes with £800 million of extra investment for young people in our colleges and sixth forms next year, above and beyond what was planned for this year and supporting 20,000 more students. That is why the target for 50% of our young people to go to university is evolving, because to compete in this changing world, we need to nurture a much broader range of talent.
As the Prime Minister has announced, we have a new ambition. No longer just half; we want two-thirds of our young people to get into high-level learning, be it academic, technical, or an apprenticeship. But pro-technical and pro-vocational does not mean being anti-academic. Our universities are a stamp of quality recognised across the world, a source of immense national pride, and a driver of economic strength in our regions. To any young person growing up in England today, I say this: if you want to go to university, if it is right for you, and if you meet the requirements, this Government will back you. That is why we are introducing new targeted maintenance grants for those students most in need, funded by a levy on international students’ fees, because in this country, opening up access for domestic students from disadvantaged communities is my priority.
We also need a system that delivers for working people living busy lives. That is why we are making higher-level learning more flexible and available in bitesize chunks, with break points in degrees, and supported by the lifelong learning entitlement. But it is not only degrees that matter. I want to see our universities working with colleges to deliver more level 4 and 5 qualifications, and to spread that excellence far and wide, making it easier for people to take those vital courses in their local further education college, and delivering the “missing middle” of skills that is so important for our economy and for our people seeking their next promotion.
To safeguard the excellence in our universities for future generations, last November I announced that tuition fees would increase by £285 this academic year. Today I confirm that we will increase undergraduate tuition fee caps for all higher education providers in line with forecast inflation for the next two academic years. We will future-proof our maintenance loan offer by increasing maintenance loans in line with forecast inflation every academic year. To provide long-term certainty over future funding, we will legislate, when parliamentary time allows, to increase tuition fee caps automatically in the future, linked to quality. We will not allow institutions that do not take quality seriously make their students pay more. Charging full fees will be conditional on high-quality teaching, balancing stability for universities with fairness for students and taxpayers.
Within this White Paper is a challenge to our universities to build on what makes them great, drive up access, drive out low-quality provision, improve collaboration and push forward innovation, deliver the research breakthroughs that will revitalise our economy, and feed that energy back into our local communities.
We will support every young person to take the pathway that is right for them—technical, academic or vocational—but I will not accept their having no pathway at all. Far too many of our young people find themselves not in employment, education or training. From there, they become isolated from society, disconnected from success and their hope fading, and that must change. We will strengthen the part played by schools in the transition to post-16 education, we will improve accountability, with a bigger role for strategic authorities, and we will introduce a new guarantee. Any 16 or 17-year-old not in education or training will automatically get a place at a local provider. I will not let opportunity slip away, just as those young people are getting going in life.
The White Paper delivers on that promise to our young people to give them the skills that they need, but the task of revitalising our skills system is not the isolated work of one Department or another. It is the collective undertaking of local and national leaders, together with our workforces, businesses and trade unions. It is mission-led Government in action and the prize is huge: opportunity for our young people, growth for our economy and renewal for our nation. I commend this statement to the House.
Bridget Phillipson
It is a real shame that the right hon. Lady cannot bring herself to welcome anything that we have announced today. It is par for the course; that is how she likes to do things. In government, the Conservatives talked about how they valued post-16 education. Their record was very different, of course. The difference between record and rhetoric is the difference between our parties, and it is clear for all to see.
We are investing £800 million more in further education, while colleges were cut to the bone under the Tories. We are putting a real focus on vocational education and FE, restoring their esteem, giving them proper respect and simplifying the qualification landscape that the Tories made even more muddled, and we are securing the future of our world-renowned universities. I did not hear whether the right hon. Lady accepted, disagreed, welcomed or did not support what I have set out today about university funding. If she does not support it, I would like to know how she intends to safeguard our world-leading universities into the future.
As usual, we heard plenty from the right hon. Lady about debt-trap degrees. We often hear a lot of talk about low-value courses or Mickey Mouse degrees, with an answer never given as to which young people should not be going to university, which courses that applies to or which institutions she has in mind when she makes sweeping generalisations of that kind. It is always working-class kids and other people’s children who will lose out from the snobbery that comes from saying that education is not for people like them.
This Labour Government will deliver a world-leading university system alongside brilliant technical and vocational routes so that all our young people have access to brilliant careers and training opportunities, including throughout their lives. This is about choice for young people and finding the route and the path that is best for them. This Labour Government say to young people, “Further study is important; it is for you. It matters to us, and it should matter to you as well.” That is why we are bringing changes to the qualifications landscape.
In answer to the right hon. Lady’s question, we believe that T-levels were a welcome and important addition to the qualifications landscape. They provide high-quality technical qualifications, with strong work placements alongside them, and sit alongside well-established A-levels, but the rest of the system alongside that is missing. We are making sure that we have good, strong routes through V-levels that young people will be able to combine with A-level study. That is for those young people who are not quite so clear at the age of 16 whether they want to specialise in one particular area. As the right hon. Lady will know, a T-level is the equivalent of three A-levels, and it requires young people at the age of 16 to make a definitive choice about the future of their career. We want to ensure that there is a range of high-quality options so that those 900 qualifications will move towards becoming part of the new V-level system. We will launch a consultation on how we deliver that, and we are keen to hear from businesses as a part of that.
The right hon. Lady asked about GCSEs and English and maths resits, and she criticised our plans to get more young people through their English and maths GCSEs. In order to do that, there has to be a stepping stone to making it happen. An endless cycle of unnecessary resits is not the way to support more young people, including those from disadvantaged backgrounds, to get English or maths GCSEs. She and her party were happy to consign a generation of young people to failure, endless resits and a sense of desperation. We want to ensure that they make progress and master the basics then move on to getting that good, strong GCSE pass.
This Government will ensure that all our young people have the opportunities and chances that they need to get on. The Conservatives might be determined to ensure that fewer young people have the chance to go on to university and that our businesses do not have the skills they need, but this Labour Government will ensure that apprenticeship starts are there, with good, strong FE options alongside our world-leading universities. That is what this White Paper is all about.
Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. I welcome the Government’s focus on further education and skills, which have been overlooked for far too long and are critical to the delivery of the Government’s missions. My Committee has recently undertaken an inquiry into FE and skills, and I am pleased to see a number of our recommendations reflected in the statement, particularly in the commitment to address the vortex of failure in which the current system of English and maths resits traps far too many young people.
I welcome the priority of increasing the quality of further education, but there are two key contributors to quality that the Secretary of State did not mention in her statement. The first is the 15% pay gap between teachers in schools and teachers in FE colleges, which is a barrier to recruitment and retention for colleges. The second is the inability of FE colleges to reclaim VAT, a situation for which my Committee found no justification and which City College Norwich told us made the difference of a whole floor to a new building that it had recently completed. How does the Secretary of State plan to ensure that the further education sector has not only the policy framework to improve quality but the necessary resources?
Bridget Phillipson
I am grateful to the Chair of the Education Committee. We continue to keep all such matters under review, and I can be clear with her that we believe that further education colleges are engines of growth and opportunity in our communities. This White Paper is about ensuring a prestigious, world-class system in which we will reform initial training in further education, continue to invest in whole-career professional development for FE teachers and build ties with industry to ensure that FE teachers have the greatest opportunity to develop their teaching skills and subject expertise to help young people to achieve and thrive. Alongside that, we will match that support with appropriate challenge, so that we continue to raise the bar on standards through the new Ofsted system with the backstop of the FE Commissioner.
Ian Sollom (St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire) (LD)
I too thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of her statement. There is far too much in this White Paper to respond to comprehensively in two minutes, so let me focus on three critical issues.
The first issue is V-levels. The Secretary of State talks about ending confusion, yet she is introducing a new qualification that sounds remarkably like BTECs—they are flexible, sector-based and can mix with A-levels. BTECs already work: 200,000 students took them last year, 99% of universities accept them and one in five UK workers have one. If we are recreating BTECs, why scrap them first? We should keep both until 2030, so that we can compare outcomes. T-levels reached 1% uptake after five years, so let us not repeat that mistake.
The second issue is lifelong learning. The Secretary of State rightly speaks about the working mother needing to upskill, but will the support be sufficient to make that real? The lifelong learning entitlement is welcome, but the Government have cut over-21 apprenticeships, including those in shortage professions such as nursing and social work. What confidence do the Government have that their LLE can cover the costs of providing that vocational education, particularly in subjects with high operating costs?
The third issue is the international student levy. We support maintenance grants—another manifesto commitment we made that the Government have adopted—but funding them by taxing international students is self-defeating. This is incredibly tricky to model, but analysis shows that the levy could cut up to 135,000 domestic student places over five years and reduce our economy by £2.2 billion. That is not helping disadvantaged students. Will the Secretary of State make the modelling transparent and promise that opportunity will not be narrowed by the levy? There are many more questions, but I appreciate that I do not have time to ask them all.
There is much to welcome in this White Paper’s ambition, but we must guard against unintended consequences and missed opportunities. The Lib Dems stand ready to work with the Government to get this right.
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
Order. We will have just another 30 minutes or so of questions, because we have a big debate later, so colleagues must keep their questions short.
Mrs Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)
The previous Government tried hard to take a hatchet to many vocational courses, reflecting how little they valued those hugely important subjects and skills. Can the Minister confirm that the new V-level qualifications show that this Government have listened to the education sector, employers and students, and will allow more young people greater choice in achieving their pathway to a successful future?
Giving Every Child the Best Start in Life
Nusrat Ghani Excerpts(3 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
Order. To ensure that everyone gets in, could questions and answers be short?
Joe Powell (Kensington and Bayswater) (Lab)
The IFS found that Sure Start delivered benefits significantly greater than its cost, yet it was still slashed by the Tories, with well over 1,000 centres closing. It was one of the biggest acts of vandalism under austerity, stunting life chances for too many for a generation. Can the Secretary of State outline how she expects this investment to work in areas with very high levels of inequality, such as my constituency, where life expectancy at birth differs by 19 years between one community and another?
School-based Nursery Capital Grants
Nusrat Ghani Excerpts(6 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
Order. Long questions are just going to prevent others from getting in, so I ask Members please to keep them short.
Sean Woodcock (Banbury) (Lab)
In response to my hon. Friend the Member for Bootle (Peter Dowd), I actually think there are fewer Conservative Members present than there are pages in the book “The Very Hungry Caterpillar”, which says everything about where they are coming from.
I am really grateful to the Secretary of State for her statement and for the fact that the town of Chipping Norton in my constituency will get one of the first 300 school-based nurseries announced today. Does she find it hard, as I do, to take lectures from the Conservative party when it comes to the provision of childcare?
Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, because this is an investment in early years, which is an investment in the future of our communities. In my constituency, there is an investment of hundreds of thousands of pounds at Springhill primary academy in Burntwood, Boney Hay primary academy in Burntwood and St Stephen’s primary in Fradley. These schools do amazing work in supporting the next generation, and this money will be used to renovate facilities, give children a better environment in which to start their learning, expand the number of places and help provide the 30 hours of free childcare that working parents so desperately need. Can I put on record my thanks to these schools, and can I ask if the Secretary of State will join me in visiting schools and celebrating the work they do?
Bridget Phillipson
I will do my very best to visit Lichfield to see the fantastic provision and, critically, to see the brilliant work my hon. Friend is doing to champion local schools and nurseries in his constituency.
British Indian Ocean Territory
Nusrat Ghani Excerpts(8 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
Order. Time is short, so I will now call the Front-Bench spokespeople. I call the shadow Secretary of State for Defence.
James Cartlidge
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Are there any rules whereby the amount of transparency from a Government should be determined according to the size of their majority?
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I think the Member knows that that is not a matter for the Chair. Let the Minister continue.
Catherine West
That was the second point of order that was not really a point of order. It is quite fun to be in opposition, but what we have seen in the past 24 hours is genuine leadership on defence matters, as opposed to some very high jinks.
Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Bill [Lords]
Nusrat Ghani ExcerptsTuesday 25th February 2025
(8 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Act 2025 View all Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Act 2025 Debates Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts Amendment Paper: HL Bill 38-R-I Marshalled list for Report - (3 Feb 2025)
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
The reasoned amendment in the name of Ian Sollom has been selected.
Bridget Phillipson
My hon. Friend always champions the ceramics industry in his constituency. We have had many conversations on that topic, and he is absolutely right to put it into context. Skills England will benefit the ceramics industry and his constituents because we will be able to move much more rapidly to make changes to qualifications and training requirements in order to meet the needs of employers, with further flexibility, shorter courses, and foundation apprenticeships for young people for the chance to get on, including in long-standing traditional industries as well as in future jobs and opportunities.
The Bill is a crucial leap forward, bringing the different parts of the skills system closer together, and it paves the way for Skills England. It transfers the current functions of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education to the Secretary of State, not to exercise power from Westminster, but to empower the expert leadership of Skills England to drive the change we need. Bringing those functions to Skills England will place the content and design of technical qualifications at the heart of our skills system, where they belong.
Skills England has existed in shadow form since Labour took power and began the work of change in July. It set out its first “state of the nation” report into skills gaps in our economy in September. Skills England is moving ahead. The leadership is in place, and by laying the groundwork for a swift transition to Skills England, we are moving a step closer towards a joined-up skills system.
At its heart, this Bill is about growth and opportunity—growth for our economy, and opportunity for our people—and there is no time to waste. We need action, not delay. The people of this country need better jobs, higher wages and brighter futures; no more vacancies unfilled due to a lack of skills, no more chances missed and no more growth lost. We need change now, not change pushed back to some foggy future, so we are pushing ahead.
This is legislation that builds on what has come before but demands more—more cohesion, more dynamism and more ambition. That is how we break down the barriers to opportunity, that is how we fire up the engines of economic growth, and that is how we deliver the future that this country deserves—the bright hope that our best days lie ahead of us. I commend this Bill to the House.
Laura Trott
I have huge respect for the hon. Gentleman and thought his earlier question was spot on. There is much that needs to be improved, but that is much less vague than Skills England, which is what we have in front of us at the moment. There are risks of distraction, with the time and cost involved in creating a new agency in the Department for Education. If the Government were serious about progressing quickly with the urgent strategic issues that I accept are needed in skills reform, the most effective step would be to build on the success of IfATE, rather than dismantling it. Instead, the Bill threatens to undo much of the progress made under successive Conservative Governments in building a world-class apprenticeships and technical education system. It is fiddling for no reason, change for no purpose and, as is so often the case with this Government, the opposite of what is required.
Helen Hayes
I thank the right hon. Member for his intervention. I was delighted recently to visit a school in my constituency, and a careers fair that gave young people the opportunity to meet many employers and providers of further education face to face, in order to give real meaning and reality to what such opportunities might provide in the future. It is important that young people have those opportunities.
Recently, I was delighted to visit the Lambeth college campus in Vauxhall, which is part of the Southbank University group, with my hon. Friend the Member for Vauxhall and Camberwell Green (Florence Eshalomi). We met young people engaged in cutting-edge training in robotics, renewable energy installation, dental technology and game design and production. They were being equipped with valuable skills to help them to access high-quality jobs, with the possibility, in some cases, of progressing their training all the way to degree level at the university.
The college is a good example of a strategic vision being applied to skills at a local level to ensure that employers’ needs are being met, and that the best possible opportunities are made available to young people, but not everywhere can benefit from such a strategic approach at present. I therefore welcome the Bill, which will formally establish Skills England. It is encouraging that this Government are giving further education and skills the strategic prominence they need, and seeking to establish an effective national agency to deliver a step change in the strategy that underpins our approach to skills and the quality and availability of training opportunities.
Skills England has been operating in shadow form within the Department for Education since July last year. Following the passage of the Bill, it will become an executive agency. This important Bill will work to underpin many of the strategic aims of the Government, including the delivery of economic growth, the skills to provide the additional 1.5 million homes that need to be built, and the skills to drive the urgently needed transition of our energy sector to achieve net zero, and the much-needed improvements in our national health service and in social care.
As the first Skills England report highlights, we currently have a fragmented and confusing landscape that lets down learners, frustrates businesses and holds back growth. The current system that the Government inherited has been badly neglected and urgent action is needed to deliver the change and scale of ambition required.
While I welcome the Bill, there are a number of issues on which I would be grateful for further clarity from the Government. The Bill does not provide a statutory underpinning for Skills England, meaning that the Secretary of State and future Secretaries of State can make fundamental changes to Skills England or close it down without the consent of Parliament. That calls into question the ability of Skills England to deliver a stable long-term underpinning of the skills system over a period of time. I understand the Government’s urgency, but it is important that in delivering this change Skills England is placed on a really solid foundation.
In order to be effective in delivering the skills system that our country needs, Skills England will need to have leverage with a number of different Government Departments beyond the Department for Education, yet the chief executive of Skills England is the equivalent of a director-level post in the civil service, not a director general, calling into question the extent to which appropriately senior people from across Government will be required to act on its recommendations and work in effective partnership. As the Bill progresses, the Government should consider the seniority of the CEO in that light.
Partnership working with key stakeholders outside Government, including training providers, trade unions, employers and devolved authorities will also be critical to the success of Skills England, but none of that is written into the Bill, and the ways in which Skills England will be held accountable for effective partnership working are unclear. Will the Secretary of State take further action to address that?
The impact statement for the Bill states that there may be a drop in apprenticeship starts while the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education’s functions are transferred to the Secretary of State and then to Skills England, with a disproportionate impact on adult apprenticeships, disadvantaged learners and disadvantaged regions. Will the Secretary of State explain what steps she will take to minimise and mitigate that potential short-term drop?
The success of Skills England will depend on a series of wider factors that should be considered at the point at which it is being established. There is a significant issue with the funding of sixth form colleges, particularly around inequities in pay between teachers in schools and colleges, exacerbated by the failure to extend the recent pay increase to teachers to those employed by colleges. It cannot be right that a teacher in a college can be paid less than a teacher in a school sixth form for teaching exactly the same subject.
To drive parity of esteem between pupils following an academic route and those following a vocational route, it is important that sixth form colleges are able to both recruit and retain teachers. That means addressing the lower pay in sixth form colleges compared with schools, and the gap between teacher salaries and the salaries that teachers could receive in industry. It is a real problem for colleges seeking to recruit teachers of vocational subjects that those who have the skills to teach trade can often earn far more by practising that trade in the private sector. There is currently very little obligation on industry to release staff to deliver vocational education or to help to secure the pipeline of vocational teachers, including through post-retirement options. The Government should give further consideration to the recruitment and retention of high-quality teachers in the further education sector.
For some students in the further education sector, their school days have not been the happiest days of their lives. College or an apprenticeship should be the place where they start to find the things that they can excel at and where their confidence is built because they start to succeed. The importance of a functional level of English and maths is universally accepted and understood, so something is badly wrong in our education system when 38% of students do not achieve a grade 3 or above in English and maths at GCSE. The cycle of failure ends up continuing in the FE sector, which requires them to resit again and again. There must be a better way to ensure the functional skills in these subjects that employers need within further education, while enabling young people genuinely to succeed, build their confidence and thrive.
Finally, I will raise the issue of the huge differential in the information provided to sixth form students as they decide on their next steps after school or college—a point made by the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) earlier in the debate. When meeting with skills providers and school leaders in my constituency recently, many participants highlighted how a move to university was often presented as a natural, secure step, with multiple options and a well-trodden path through the UCAS process, while vocational options, including apprenticeships and degree apprenticeships, were not presented with the same clarity or coherence, or even within the same timeframe. That makes it harder for teachers to advise their students and for parents to have confidence in pathways that may appear less predictable and secure. If we want to see true parity of esteem between academic and vocational routes, that needs to change, and I hope that it will be a priority for the newly established Skills England.
The Education Committee recognises the strategic importance of further education and skills, and we have recently launched a substantial inquiry that aims to understand how the further education system can better equip young people with skills and qualifications for a range of sectors experiencing labour shortages while opening up a wider range of opportunities to young people and mid-career switchers. We will make our recommendations to the Government in due course, and we look forward to playing our part in scrutinising the work of Skills England.
Higher Education Regulatory Approach
Nusrat Ghani Excerpts(9 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Bridget Phillipson
What we inherited from the previous Government was not a genuine attempt to solve a genuine problem; it was a mess designed to put party ahead of country. We saw a misplaced fascination with headlines for themselves, rather than a serious attempt to safeguard freedom of speech and academic freedom. It is precisely because this Government care about academic freedom and freedom of speech that we are determined to get this right, unlike the Conservative party. We are not content to leave it to vice-chancellors, who have done too little for too long. Universities must be places of robust discussion, where students’ views are challenged and academic freedom is central.
One of my many predecessors in the previous Government, the former Member for Chippenham, was unable to set out how the then Government’s proposals would prevent Holocaust deniers coming on to campus. Let me be clear: Holocaust denial has no place on campus or anywhere else in our society. The legislation would have emboldened Holocaust denial, and showed a shameful disregard for the welfare of Jewish students.
On the legal proceedings the right hon. Lady mentions, she was a member of the previous Government and knows very well that I am unable to comment on any aspect of that.
I said I would consider all options. I have done precisely that and have returned to the House, as I intended, to provide an update. If Conservative Members want to know what a U-turn on free speech looks like, I suggest they turn their attention to Liz Truss, who for so long extolled the virtues of free speech and is now on some bizarre quest to cancel the Prime Minister for saying that she and the Conservative party crashed the economy. Freedom of speech cuts both ways. What a bunch of snowflakes!
Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for confirming the Government’s approach to the implementation of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023, and I welcome the clarity that she has provided today.
The implementation of the Act will present some challenges for universities and for students. The Secretary of State will know that there can sometimes be a fine line between free speech and hate speech, and between statements of views and opinions and incitement or encouragement to violence or intimidation in the real world. Can she assure the House that she will ensure that universities and students are absolutely clear about the limits to free speech, which are already enshrined in law, and that support will be provided on the interpretation of that when it is needed?
Professor Shitij Kapur, vice-chancellor and president of King’s College London, has said:
“Universities are not there to function as a Speakers’ Corner where anyone can stand up and express an opinion not necessarily supported by facts. If academic freedom is to mean anything, it must be accompanied by the academic obligation for ideas and claims to be accompanied by evidence and reason. Proponents have an obligation to engage and respond to those questioning their assertions and conduct that debate and discourse in a civil manner.”
How will the Secretary of State ensure—particularly as the erosion of fact-checking and moderation on social media is taking place before our very eyes—that the implementation of the Act results in a high quality of evidence-based discourse conducted in a culture of civility?
Bridget Phillipson
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her questions and her approach, and I look forward to discussing these issues with the Select Committee in due course should its members so wish.
My hon. Friend’s point about disagreement is important. Free speech should be robust and we should be able to express our views, but all of us, especially those in public life, have a duty to ensure that we do so in a way that is responsible. As for the tort—this is at the heart of the issue that she has identified—I was concerned that the potential impact of legal proceedings and the financial consequences for providers of breaching their duties under the Act might have led to some providers unduly prioritising free speech that is hateful or degrading over the interests of those who feel harassed and intimidated. These issues can be finely balanced. We will provide further clarity through the Office for Students, but let me make it clear that academic freedom and freedom of speech are crucial tenets of our country’s history.
Ian Sollom (St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire) (LD)
I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of her statement.
The Liberal Democrats fully support free speech, which, as several Members have pointed out, is at the heart of academic freedom, but it was clear from the start that this piece of legislation was not based on evidence, was not proportionate, and was fundamentally flawed. We welcomed the pausing of its implementation last year, and I welcome now the acknowledgement of its flaws and the Secretary of State’s move to repeal the provisions on the tort and on student unions in particular. I must, however, press her on the fundamental question of why the Act is necessary.
Higher education institutions already operate within a legal framework to ensure that freedom of speech within the law is secured for academic staff, students, employees and visiting speakers, and universities have already taken action to improve their policies and processes relating to freedom of speech. Universities UK, which represents over 140 universities, has reissued and expanded its guidance in this area, as well as having regular discussions with university leaders to support them with these challenges. Would the Secretary of State consider taking a more meaningful step to ensure that students are safe, welcome and protected at universities by giving higher education institutions a statutory duty of care for their students?
The Secretary of State also referred to the well-documented fears of minority groups, particularly those in Jewish communities, that the Act in its previous form would allow a platform for extremist views, and she mentioned Holocaust denial. We had some indication of this in her statement, but will she provide more details of her plans to protect those from minority groups and communities on our university campuses?
Bridget Phillipson
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising those questions. I will start where we agree, and then move on to where I might disagree with him.
I agree that freedom of speech and academic freedom are essential, but, sadly, we have seen too many examples of their not being upheld in the way that they should be by universities. The right hon. Member for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott) raised a number of cases in which we have seen unacceptable practice, and some individuals have had to seek recourse through employment law when it should have been possible for them to seek redress sooner. That is precisely what we are seeking to deal with in ensuring that the Office for Students is able to focus on the most serious cases without being caught up in complex cases that could be less well founded or even nonsensical.
I want to be clear that we have engaged with people with a range of views on these topics, including those who hold gender-critical views, those who were in favour of the legislation and those who had concerns. That careful process of engagement with the sector, stakeholders and people with a range of views has enabled me to come to the House today and set out our approach.
Mr Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)
I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement. It is good to see that our universities will no longer be a battleground in which political parties seek to make headlines—unsuccessfully, I might add. Does she agree that now that she has taken decisive action on this issue, it is time to talk about the financial situation facing many of our universities, which threatens their very existence? We know that students are paying far more for far less at university, and we need to end that ridiculous cycle.
Bridget Phillipson
I agree with my hon. Friend that, across the board, there are big challenges in the university sector. That is why I took the difficult but necessary decision last year to increase the fees that they are able to charge. This year, we will engage in reform right across the sector to provide the long-term financial sustainability that is required. As my hon. Friend recognises, we on the Government Benches are clear that our universities are a central part of our local and regional economies, and a beacon of excellence around the world. That is why so many students from around the globe seek to come to our world-leading universities.
Bridget Phillipson
I know that the right hon. Gentleman is probably used to his party engaging in these discussions on quite difficult and sensitive issues in a rather reckless and irresponsible way, but we on these Benches take our time to do this seriously and properly to make sure that we get it right, because this is such an important area. He will have heard from my speech—I will set out further detail—the requirements that will be in place through registration conditions, the fact that the Office for Students will be able to impose penalties on institutions, and the requirements that we expect of all higher education providers. My message to vice-chancellors and institutions today is that they need to do more, and they need to do it better.
Darren Paffey (Southampton Itchen) (Lab)
I thank my right hon. Friend for her statement and for the measured, practical and common-sense approach that it takes, which is in sharp contrast to what we are hearing on the Opposition Benches at the moment. Although we will always defend their right to their opinions, a right to their own facts is rather regrettable and their revisionism is quite astounding. I know at first hand the value of a university education. It is about having our views challenged. It is about critical thinking based on evidence and facts and having our horizons opened. Does the Minister agree that this foundation and the measures announced today are the right way to secure academic freedom in the future?
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker
We have substantial business to get through today before the House rises, so if questions are short I can get everybody in; if they are not, people are going to be disappointed.
Sir Gavin Williamson (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge) (Con)
I thank the Secretary of State for coming to the House and setting out the revised position of the Government. I am particularly concerned about the removal of the tort, because it effectively removes the real consequences for people who disregard free speech and the consequences that could be imposed on an institution or organisation. If that is going to be the case, can she set out to the House what resources will be dedicated to the director of free speech? Let us hope this is not just a one-person fig leaf. How many people are going to be working for them? What resource will there be to ensure that free speech is protected?
Bridget Phillipson
I am afraid I did not quite catch the very last part of the right hon. Gentleman’s questions, but I will happily look in Hansard and return to him on that point.
Bridget Phillipson
I am afraid I am not going to do that without having reviewed exactly what the right hon. Gentleman said, Madam Deputy Speaker. I know him quite well. The Department for Education and the Home Office are looking jointly at some of these areas, and I want to be clear that national security is our No. 1 priority as a Government. I am grateful to all those who have engaged in good faith with the Department in this conversation. They hold a wide range of views: there are those who are for the Act and those who are against, as well as those with views somewhere in the middle and those with some new ones. I am grateful for their contributions to this discussion. I hope they can all see that we have taken this seriously and that we now have a workable plan to ensure that freedom of speech and academic freedom in our institutions are protected into the future.
Bridget Phillipson
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for sharing those comments. I pay tribute to the Union of Jewish Students for the amazing work it does every day to support Jewish students on campus and to ensure that their voices are heard, including at the highest levels of Government. I give my commitment to UJS that I will continue to work with it and other student groups to make sure their voice is always heard. We as a Government are resolutely behind them in the fight against antisemitism in our country.
Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)
As someone who was an academic until about 5 am on 5 July last year, I thank the Secretary of State for her statement and for the leadership she has shown on this issue. I will ask a question in the context of my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.
I am proud of all the universities in Edinburgh and how they attract students from all over the world, but last year when I visited the Edinburgh Hebrew Congregation, which is the main synagogue in Edinburgh, I was ashamed to hear of the intimidation that Jewish students were facing in university. I was pleased to hear that universities are taking that seriously and I know that the Edinburgh faith forum is too. Freedom of speech is an important right, but that should never extend to bigotry and hate. Does the Secretary of State agree that students should be free to practise their faith, always, and able to display their faith publicly, no matter what it is, without fear of intimidation?
Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill
Nusrat Ghani Excerpts(9 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Bridget Phillipson
I am afraid that I am concluding now.
We are bringing together the system’s many parts into a collaborative, coherent whole with children at its heart. Our ambition to support children does not stop here. We expect to bring forward further legislation when parliamentary time allows. Our work to erase the stain of child poverty must and will continue through the child poverty taskforce, which I am proud to co-chair with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.
Reducing the burden on schools, freeing teachers to teach and children to learn—today is about action. When colleagues from across the House read the Bill in all its detail, they will find running through its 60 clauses one golden thread, one common theme, one objective, one common cause. It is not structures or ideology, and they will find no pet projects or stale dogma. They will see that our focus is firmly on children: their life chances are the aim, their protection is the objective and their success is our common cause. This Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill is written for them. It is introduced to the House for them. It will be implemented for them—for their safety, for their schooling and for their futures. I commend the Bill to the House.
Laura Trott
No, I am going to finish. This is an opportunity for MPs across the House to give victims the justice they deserve. Hon. Members have heard our arguments on the inquiry and on schools. I hope that today, when we vote on our reasoned amendment, the Government see sense on both.
Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)
The hon. Lady mentions school breakfast. Child obesity is up by a third and diabetes is up by a fifth. Does she agree that, while free breakfast clubs are a great opportunity to ensure children are fed, we must also ensure that school meals are healthy and nutritious; and that, alongside the Bill, school food standards need to be updated in line with the most recent nutritional advice, making it clear that they apply to breakfast?
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
Order. We have a very long speaking list, so interventions must be short.
Helen Hayes
I agree with the hon. Lady that school food, in whichever setting it is delivered, should be of the highest quality. She will know about the pressures on school budgets. My constituency has experienced among the highest drops in funding for local schools of anywhere in the country. That has eroded the money that schools have to spend on high-quality food. I know that that is one of the areas on which those on the Government Front Bench will be anxious to deliver over time as public finances permit.
The measures to support care leavers are welcome, but are limited to extended Staying Close support and requiring local authorities to publish the details of their offer. What further measures does the Minister intend to take to improve outcomes for care leavers and to ensure they get the same opportunities as their peers? Only 14% of care leavers go to university compared with 46% of non-care-experienced young people. What further measures will the Government take to support care leavers to access and stay in higher education? Why are the Government not proposing a national offer for care leavers to address the postcode lottery in care, in particular to provide care leavers with the confidence that if they choose to attend university away from home, because that is the best option for them, the same support will be available to them wherever they study?
The policies and practices of other Departments also have a profound effect on the experience of care leavers. Can the Minister confirm whether, outside of the Bill, the Government are still considering the expansion of corporate parenting duties, so that every part of the state is required to take seriously its duty to looked-after children and care-experienced people?
Finally, to deliver on the commitments in the Bill, those who work with children and families will need support. There are challenges in recruitment and retention across many of the professions, from social work to teaching to the early years. Will the Government set out a workforce strategy to ensure that training places, continuing professional development and effective recruitment strategies are in place to secure the staff we need to deliver the transformation our children deserve? The Bill will introduce a series of measures that will start the process of rebuilding support for children and their families, and that is very welcome. My Committee will continue to take an interest in the detail of the Bill and seek to ensure that it is as effective as it can be in delivering a system that can support every child to thrive, and in contributing to the debate about the further steps, beyond the scope of the Bill, that will also be needed.
Munira Wilson
I am happy to support that. In fact, when the previous Administration introduced the schools Bill, which they then decided to bin, the Liberal Democrats in the House of Lords tabled an amendment that did just that, and I am sure that we will seek to do the same this time around to help the families who choose to home-educate.
Although this Bill sets out some important reforms to our schools system, the Liberal Democrats would like to see greater ambition. The attainment gap has widened significantly in recent years, and it is unacceptable that outcomes for less affluent and more vulnerable students are getting worse. We believe that one piece of the puzzle would be a tutoring guarantee for every disadvantaged pupil who needs support. When implemented correctly, tutoring has proved its worth time and again. Seven in 10 parents whose children receive tutoring at school say that it has raised their child’s attainment. We know that it also boosts young people’s confidence, and tutoring can help tackle persistent absence, which is a huge issue in our schools. I hope the Secretary of State agrees that a tutoring guarantee, introduced via this Bill, would be a powerful tool in narrowing the attainment gap and ensuring that every child gets the high-quality education they deserve.
Let me reiterate that this is a Bill that we must get right. Now is not the time to play politics. Now is the time to work to keep our children safe, to give them the chance to flourish. That is our task across this House, and it is the mission that my party will pursue as the Bill progresses.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I do not wish to set a time limit, so if colleagues keep their contributions nice and short and tight, we can try to get everybody in.
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
We have more than 60 colleagues hoping to get in, so I will implement a five-minute time limit.
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
To ensure that as many colleagues as possible can get in, and that not many are disappointed by not getting in, we are going to reduce the speaking limit to four minutes. I call Vikki Slade.
Syria
Nusrat Ghani Excerpts(10 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Development (Anneliese Dodds)
With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement about the current situation in Syria.
Ten days have passed since Assad’s departure. The Government welcomed the fall of his cruel and barbaric regime, and the opportunity it offers for Syrians. However, while there is some cause for celebration, fighting and violence continue across the country.
The situation in Syria has developed rapidly over the last week. In the north-east, the US-brokered ceasefire between the Syrian Democratic Forces and the Türkiye-Syrian National Army has been temporarily extended, but the situation remains highly fragile. In Damascus, Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham—or HTS, as I will call them for the rest of the speech—have appointed a Prime Minister to lead an interim Government until March 2025, but they have given very little detail on the shape and focus of that Government.
The UK Government remain committed to the people of Syria. We support a Syrian-led and Syrian-owned political transition process based on the principles of UN Security Council resolution 2254 and leading to an inclusive, non-sectarian and representative Government. We are hopeful that anyone seeking a role in governing Syria will demonstrate a commitment to: the protection of human rights, including for women and girls; unfettered access for humanitarian aid; the safe destruction of chemical weapons stockpiles; and combating terrorism and extremism. The UK urges the transitional Government to adhere to those principles to build a more hopeful, secure and peaceful Syria.
On Saturday, Jordan convened an Arab Foreign Ministers’ discussion, followed by a meeting with EU, French, UN, US and UK representatives. All involved, including the UK, reiterated their support for an inclusive political transition process. It is critical that the international community works together in a co-ordinated and complementary manner to ensure the best outcomes for the Syrian people. Along with our partners, we want to see a new political process that is comprehensive, representative, inclusive and, most importantly, determined by the Syrian people themselves. We must also ensure that chemical weapons stockpiles are secured, not used, and that the transition to new governance is peaceful.
For all those reasons, it is right that the UK seeks to use all the channels available to us to deal with HTS where we have to. To that end, senior officials from the FCDO have travelled to Damascus. They have underlined the UK’s support for the Syrian people and discussed the pathway to a more hopeful, representative and peaceful future for Syria with the new interim Syrian authorities and civil society. During their visit, senior officials also discussed the importance of an inclusive transitional political process that protects the rights of all Syrians and prevents further instability.
Those words are important, of course, but they must be supported by actions, too. The humanitarian situation on the ground remains dire, with over 16 million Syrians in need of humanitarian assistance—and that is purely within the borders of Syria itself. That is why, on Saturday, the Government announced a new package of international aid to help the most vulnerable Syrians, including in Jordan and Lebanon, on top of that announced by the Prime Minister on 9 December. The UK’s £61 million in aid will help provide emergency healthcare and nutrition, and support displaced Syrian children. We call on more of our partners to join us in committing greater humanitarian support. I commend this statement to the House.
UK Leadership on Sudan
Nusrat Ghani Excerpts(11 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Anneliese Dodds
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising those issues, and I thank her and many other Members gathered here for their leadership on them. She mentioned the situation in neighbouring countries. I am aware that in Chad, South Sudan and Egypt there are large numbers of refugees from Sudan. We have discussed those matters with representatives from each of those countries. We are seeing quite different profiles in the relative economic circumstances of refugees in those countries and in how they are being supported. I know that in Egypt there is a determination to support people, as indeed there is in South Sudan and in Chad.
On conversations with civil society organisations in South Sudan, I have had a number of discussions—particularly with women’s rights organisations there—about the conflict, and I have spoken directly with some of those who have fled Sudan. I have spoken with representatives from Chad about it as well. We must be conscious that, as I mentioned, many of those countries already face significant challenges in food insecurity, economic development and the impact of the climate crisis, and now they are dealing with this major influx of refugees. We must pay tribute to them for enabling those refugees to seek safety and security within their borders.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
We come now to a member of the International Development Committee.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
I very much welcome the statement and the increased focus on Sudan. Evidence given to the International Development Committee is clear that those in Sudan feel that the conflict has been forgotten and ignored, partly because it has received so little international media attention. Anything that can change that is welcome. I commend to the Minister the evidence that the Committee took this week, which sets out that the most effective way of delivering aid is through local groups on the ground. More widely, what engagement has the UK had with the United Arab Emirates in particular, given their huge influence in that conflict?
Anneliese Dodds
I thank the right hon. Member for raising those incredibly important issues. I was pleased that an FCDO official engaged in that meeting, which I know was a helpful exchange of information. The right hon. Member talks about the local groups engaged in delivering humanitarian support. When I have met representatives of such groups—particularly the so-called emergency response rooms—I have been incredibly moved by their bravery, courage and absolute selflessness in getting support to those who need it. They are resolutely non-partisan in supporting their communities, and are a real sign of co-operation in action, in the hardest possible circumstances. I pay tribute to them.
The right hon. Member talks about the influence of other countries in this situation, and mentioned the UAE. As he will be aware, a number of countries are concerned about this situation, and we have had bilateral conversations, including my own discussions, with representatives from the UAE and other countries elsewhere in the Gulf.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call another member of the International Development Committee.
Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for her updates. Part of the reason that Sudan is becoming not just a devastating conflict but a protracted one is the involvement of state and non-state actors from elsewhere in Africa, the middle east and further afield. Does she consider Sudan to be a foreign policy priority as well as a humanitarian priority, and what diplomatic actions is the Department taking with the warring parties and their backers to urge de-escalation?
Anneliese Dodds
I am grateful to the hon. Member for his questions. On the overall aid budget, I can assure him that this is not just shifting funds around. If he looks at the programme budget for the FCDO for this year, 2024-25, compared with next year, 2025-26, he will see that there is an increase of £450 million. Of course, we are inheriting a situation where there has been huge turbulence within the aid budget, particularly because of the increase in in-donor refugee costs under previous Governments, but we are determined to get a grip of that turbulence and have a much more planned approach for the future.
The hon. Member asked about the measures being taken beyond aid. I have talked about the arms embargo, and we are engaged in many diplomatic efforts. Because he specifically highlighted atrocity prevention, I will also mention that the Minister for Africa, Lord Collins, hosted an event with his Dutch counterpart at the UN General Assembly that was specifically about conflict-related sexual violence. We are determined to ensure that the voices of those women and girls who have been impacted are heard, and that we are taking action against it. Of course, the UK is determined to be absolutely consistent when it comes to the prevention of access to aid during conflicts, and the hon. Member has seen that from this Government.
Noah Law (St Austell and Newquay) (Lab)
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Many members of the Select Committee, myself included, have heard of the role that online disinformation and hatred have played in some of the atrocities in Sudan. What leadership can the UK demonstrate in helping to quell some of this digital fuel on the fire in the war against Sudanese civilians?
Anneliese Dodds
I am grateful to the hon. Member for his kind words. I know that he is engaged significantly on these issues, and he has been at all the discussions of them in the House. I know that many of his constituents are concerned about this situation as well.
It really is important that we see far greater safety for those who have fled this conflict. The hon. Member talks in particular about women and girls. I mentioned before the extremely disturbing fact that, while of course women and girls must be safe everywhere, we have, for example, had rape reported in camps for internally displaced people and at checkpoints. The fact that we have seen this taking place in those contexts is extremely disturbing. We are absolutely determined, as the UK Government, that we will be working with partners and the UN agencies to ensure that we do all we can to provide such safety and security, which of course includes the food security that he has also championed.
Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)
I welcome the Minister’s statement. This week the Select Committee heard compelling evidence, including about the important role of the Sudanese diaspora, and not only in the UK but in other countries. The Minister has rightly recognised the importance of listening to civil society organisations and working with them in Sudan. Will she speak specifically about how the Department is engaging with the Sudanese diaspora here, and what practical steps are being taken to tackle the cost of remittances, given that many people are sending money back to their loved ones?
Anneliese Dodds
I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. That resolution was asking for what anyone can see is desperately needed in Sudan: an end to impediments to aid; above all, an end to the conflict; and international action to support the people of Sudan. We were deeply disappointed and frustrated that Russia vetoed that resolution, but that will not dim our resolve to work with other partners on this issue.
Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I thank the Minister for coming to the House to give this statement and for all the work the Government are doing to support the Sudanese people in the face of severe malnutrition and starvation. Keeping the Adre crossing open is extremely important. The Sudanese armed forces have committed to three months, but what diplomatic pressure are the Government bringing to bear to ensure that that crossing remains open for longer than three months? The ability to bring in ready-to-use therapeutic food is so important, and there are global shortages in the production of RUTF at the moment. Ahead of the nutrition for growth summit next year, will the Government commit to investing in scaling up production of RUTF?
Anneliese Dodds
My hon. Friend raises an important point, and he is absolutely correct. The nutrition for growth conference is coming up next year in Paris, and I was discussing that yesterday with some civil society experts. We must ensure that we are doing all we can so that there is provision of those much needed resources, especially for those already suffering from malnutrition. My hon. Friend also mentioned the additional challenge of those impediments to access to aid, which must be lifted. I am pleased that the House is united in its condemnation of those impediments, and I hope we can continue to work together on this appalling crisis.
ROYAL ASSENT
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I have to notify the House, in accordance with the Royal Assent Act 1967, that the King has signified his Royal Assent to the following Act:
Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Act 2024.
Oral Answers to Questions
Nusrat Ghani Excerpts(1 year, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Bridget Phillipson
I pay tribute to all the businesses across our country that are providing high-quality skills training and apprenticeship starts. However, apprenticeship starts for the under-25s fell by 38% in the period 2015-16 to 2022-23. It will fall to this Labour Government to turn that around.
Mr Calvin Bailey (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
Apologies, Madam Deputy Speaker; I was not expecting to be called so soon.
I thank the Secretary of State for her focus on T-levels and her recognition of the need for a pause. I back up what my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton North East (Mrs Brackenridge) said about the botched nature of the T-level roll-out. Does the Secretary of State recognise that it is a challenge for many services, such as the NHS, to absorb T-level students effectively? Those qualifications need truly to give our young people the opportunities they deserve. Will she meet me and local further education experts to discuss this issue?
Madam Deputy Speaker
If Members are bobbing, they should be prepared to be called to speak.
Bridget Phillipson
Yes, I would be very happy to meet my hon. Friend. In this period of review, we are speaking to employers, training providers and colleges to ensure that we get this right.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister for her response to those questions. I know that she does not have direct responsibility for Northern Ireland, but may I ask her about apprenticeships? In defence and cyber-security—in Thales and Spirit AeroSystems—and in agrifood, opportunities should be there for young ladies as well as for young men. What is being done to ensure that there is equality of opportunity for everyone, both male and female?
Bridget Phillipson
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for raising this matter. I would be happy to meet with him to discuss it further.
James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)
We have seen attempts by hostile states to influence our higher education sector, which the last Conservative Government took action to counter. Does the Secretary of State therefore share the concerns about reports that Peking University HSBC Business School in Oxford may be partly operating under Chinese Communist party rules, and does she expect the Office for Students to investigate that?
Bridget Phillipson
Like my hon. Friend, I take having strong freedom of expression in our universities, and students being exposed to a range of views—some of which they might find difficult or disagree with—extremely seriously. That is why it is so important to have a wide-ranging education. Officials will ensure that we engage with a wide range of views in this important area as we look at next steps, and I would be more than happy to discuss that in more detail with her.
Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)
I welcome the Secretary of State to her place. The Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 would have ensured that universities in England had the tools they needed to deal with interference and threats to freedom of speech and academic freedom, wherever they originated. Now that the Government will no longer implement that Act, will she clarify her alternative plans to protect academic freedom in the higher education sector?
Damian Hinds (East Hampshire) (Con)
At the start of the new term, we all wish everybody well for the academic year ahead. What will Ministers say next September to parents who, because of Labour’s education tax, find that class sizes are bigger and more schools are full, and that fewer children are able to get a place in their first-choice school in Bristol, Bury, Salford or Surrey?
Bridget Phillipson
The hon. Member is right in his characterisation of a system that is adversarial and where so many parents have to fight to get a good education and support for their children. I would be happy to do so, or perhaps my hon. Friend the Minister might take that meeting.
James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)
It was in response to growing demand that the last Conservative Government increased the high-needs budget to £10.5 billion and put in place a statutory override so that SEND-related deficits did not overwhelm council budgets. With that set to expire in 2026, what is the Secretary of State’s message to local authorities: is she pushing the Chancellor to extend that protection or for deficits to be written off?
Janet Daby
My hon. Friend is right. This Government have committed to recruiting 8,500 additional staff across children and adult NHS mental health services. That will help to reduce delays, provide faster treatment and ease pressure on busy mental health services. Family hubs are also crucial to providing that.
Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)
The previous Conservative Government introduced mental health support teams in schools, and the impact of the covid-19 pandemic is still being felt by students, particularly regarding mental health. Will the Secretary of State commit to continuing those mental health support teams to ensure that students can access the mental health care that they need?
Stephen Morgan
I thank my hon. Friend for his question. Breakfast clubs are about more than just food: they provide opportunities for children to play, to learn and to socialise at the start of the school day. The Government are giving parents more choice in childcare, and are supporting families with the cost of living crisis. Our plans for breakfast clubs will remove barriers to opportunity by ensuring that every child of primary school age, no matter their circumstances, is well prepared for school.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
We are moving on to topicals; the questions will be short, and the ministerial responses will be snappy.
Tim Roca (Macclesfield) (Lab)
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
Order. That concludes Education questions. I am sorry that I could not fit everyone in; better luck next time.