(6 days, 13 hours ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) for securing the debate. One Salford graduate who borrowed just over £41,000 graduated in 2018 owing more than £47,000 because interest had accrued while they were still studying. After eight years of repayments and nearly £20,000 paid back, their balance is now significantly higher than it was when they graduated.
Another graduate told me they owed £59,000 in 2020; that has now increased to more than £75,000, despite steady monthly repayments. That is not how people understand a loan to function and many borrowers were never properly warned that Governments could retrospectively alter key repayment terms.
The requests from campaigners are reasonable: reverse the repayment threshold freeze, tackle the unfair interest rate metrics and protect against retrospective changes. Those are not radical requests; they restore trust. We must understand that the marketisation of higher education has failed. We must reform the loans system, but we must ensure that our ultimate goal is more ambitious. We should abolish tuition fees and replace them with a sustainable, publicly funded model for higher education and university research, providing long-term stability for institutions and genuine opportunities for students, regardless of background.
(8 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI thank my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton Itchen (Darren Paffey) and the Backbench Business Committee for securing this important debate. I also thank Michael Wardle, who is a Royal Life Saving Society UK lifeguard, and his team at the Helly Hansen watersports centre in Salford for their dedication to saving lives in Salford. I had the pleasure of meeting them, and their passion for educating about water safety was inspiring.
In Salford Quays, countless lives have tragically been lost as young people head to the water, unaware of the dangers within. It is a ship canal, so it is incredibly deep and littered with underwater obstacles. The area is now monitored by CCTV cameras and joint council and police patrols in hot weather. Under-18s caught jumping from bridges or illegally swimming will receive a police warning, and adults will be issued with a fixed penalty notice. But that still does not stop people crowding to the quays on days like today, looking to cool off or have fun with their friends. The sad thing is there are supervised open swimming areas in the quays—areas that can offer a safer swimming environment, but they are only open at limited times and are not free, which bars too many young people from them. There is one simple thing that the Government could do to ensure that my constituents are safe, and that would be to provide just a little funding to open up these supervised lifeguarded swim areas to the public for free and for longer during the summer months. That way no young person is tempted to risk their life in dangerous areas when they can have full access to a supervised one.
Secondly, as we have heard, water safety education is critical. While it is a statutory requirement that children are able to swim 25 metres by the time they reach year 7, evidence sadly suggests that the number of children receiving swimming lessons is declining. In 2024, the Royal Life Saving Society estimated that over 140,000 children left primary school without these vital lifesaving skills. There are also inequalities in those statistics. Staggeringly, Sport England found that 50.4% of children from low-income families could swim 25 metres in year 7, compared with 85.8% of high-income families. Barriers to the statutory provision include limited pool access, transportation costs, logistics, staff shortages and cultural and religious barriers. It is critical that the Government secure water safety education on the national curriculum for England as a statutory requirement, but also that they ensure schools are provided with dedicated ringfenced budgets so they can meet that requirement.
Thirdly, I would like to draw attention to a quite staggering fact. I met my local fire service in Salford recently and learnt of the amazing work its dedicated firefighters do to save lives and keep us safe. I met the water response team, which I thought—naively, like much of the general public—was just part of its service. It is not. They do it because they are good people, not because they are funded to or required to. While there is a public perception that the fire and rescue service is responsible for responding to water rescue incidents and engaging in water safety education and prevention, there is no statutory duty on it in England to do so. However, statutory duties do exist in Wales.
The fire and rescue service responds to 999 calls and inland water rescue incidents using its existing general powers and resources. It scrimps and saves from existing budgets to try to resource the lifesaving equipment it needs, rather than that being allocated. As a result, the resource and the coverage are patchy, and firefighters often train in water safety on their own time.
I call on the Government to urgently adopt the National Fire Chiefs Council recommendations on this issue: to consult on establishing a statutory responsibility in England for inland water rescue response and prevention; to provide capital alongside continuous funding to support any new statutory duty introduced; to establish a clear lead Department with accountability for water safety prevention, mirrored at local authority level; and to update the reporting requirements of the incident recording system to more accurately record water-related deaths and injuries.
To conclude, no parent should ever receive that phone call and no person should ever needlessly lose their lives when the asks on Government are so simple. I hope the Government will do all they can to urgently implement the measures that I and others have outlined.
Darren Paffey
I thank all Members, from across the Chamber, who have taken part in this debate. I will mention a few key strands that have been raised, just because they align with some of the things that I have asked for. My hon. Friend the Member for Salford (Rebecca Long Bailey) mentioned that the fire response, which is often the first response to these terrible tragedies, is not statutory. Does she agree that a Minister with particular responsibility for drowning prevention might bring that coherence?
Darren Paffey
I hope the Minister has followed that. I do not expect everything to be on education, but there is a necessary cross-departmental organisation response that needs to happen. It goes beyond education and some of the recommendations reflect that.
My hon. Friends the Members for West Ham and Beckton (James Asser) and for Bangor Aberconwy (Claire Hughes) mentioned the information campaigns that are necessary, particularly using contemporary tools of social media, which takes me to another campaign I am involved in. The potential of social media to do good is great. Unfortunately, too often that is not what happens, so we need to hold social media companies to account, to ensure that they keep our young people safe.
My hon. Friend the Member for Shrewsbury (Julia Buckley) mentioned a wonderful community-led campaign, and there is a real example to take from that. On the contribution of my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher), I met Sam’s dad when he was in the House yesterday and I know he appreciates the work that my hon. Friend does, so I commend him for Sam’s law. He can count on my support and, I am sure, that of many others across the House. I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Ribble Valley (Maya Ellis), who, despite the focus on schools that some of the debate has necessarily taken, made an incredibly salient point about why water safety education needs to go wider, and adults learning to swim would also benefit from that.
We heard during this debate—and during Drowning Prevention Week—about the wonderful variety of waterways that we enjoy. We have heard about the Thames, from its historical east to the tropical west. The hon. Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes) mentioned the neighbouring river to mine—of course, the greatest river is the River Itchen. I share the Solent with my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin). We heard about the quays and canals of Salford and Greater Manchester, the Severn, the Ribble, the national parks, and the lidos from Ayrshire to Hilsea. We say that these waterways must be enjoyed, but they must be enjoyed safely, and we must look at how we can move on from the current situation.
I thank everyone who has added breadth to the appreciation of this issue, as well as adding weight to the sense of urgency that we must take. Hon. Members from across the Chamber have demonstrated why the ability to swim and the knowledge of what happens in different waterways up and down the country is absolutely crucial. Although we have done that through heartbreaking personal accounts, I hope that their names and stories, having been heard in this place, will move us to action.
I appreciate the Minister’s words on what is happening. I am encouraged to hear about the meetings taking place. I look forward to reading and engaging with the RSHE guidance. I remain of the view that this should be foundational, not pieced together by different approaches. I look forward to engaging further and ensuring that by Drowning Prevention Week 2026, we will have moved on and have acted and saved more lives. By then we will have been through what is already proving to be a hot summer, and indeed through the winter—the hon. Member for Meriden and Solihull East (Saqib Bhatti) rightly pointed out the dangers of ice.
I thank the Backbench Business Committee, all those who have supported and spoken in the debate, my team who have made today happen, and the various organisations—I will not list them all—helping us to move the dial on this issue. Finally, and most importantly, I thank Ness, who has been an incredible inspiration for me in the debate; I hope she sees today that her work is of national significance.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered water safety education.
(2 years, 5 months ago)
Commons ChamberWhile it is welcome that it has been reported today that RAAC has not been found in any of our schools in Salford, I must stress that the fact that the Government were unable to produce that information until today, having known about the risk since at least 2018, when a school roof in Kent collapsed, is completely unacceptable.
I am glad that Salford has no schools with RAAC problems, but in Bolton we found out on Friday that St William of York, St Andrew’s Church of England and St Bernard’s were affected. St Bernard’s was not even on any list, and St Gregory’s is still awaiting the result. Do you agree that the Government should publish the full list, not the half-baked one that they published this afternoon?
I completely agree with my constituency neighbour. I stress that not just schools are affected by this crisis; it extends to public buildings, and concerns have been raised in recent days by the building industry that certain residential properties, particularly social housing, could also be affected. On hospitals alone, a report by the National Audit Office in July this year said that structurally unsound RAAC was present in at least 41 hospitals. The Turnberg building at Salford Royal Hospital is reported to be one of them.
Despite this clear national building safety crisis, there is no detail from Government on what action will or will not be taken, no detail on the urgent funding and support that will be provided to remediate and no assurances so far that the costs will not come out of existing school, NHS and local authority budgets. Worse still, there appears to be an emerging message today from Government that this crisis is stand-alone—that it is simply a sad indictment of less-regulated old building practices that are now outdated.
That is not the true story. The real culprit here is the unashamed pursuit of austerity by this Government and the coalition before them. Let us not forget that, to start with, the coalition ripped up Labour’s Building Schools for the Future programme in 2010 and never adequately replaced it. Worse still, between 2009 and 2022 the Department for Education’s capital spending declined by 37% in cash terms and 50% in real terms. That is in addition to NHS and local authority budgets being slashed on a similar basis, with the effect that most ongoing public sector estate upgrade programmes were torn to shreds.
Sadly, as the Institute for Fiscal Studies states:
“The current crisis illustrates just how costly failing to keep on top of necessary investment in buildings and infrastructure can be.”
How much money was actually required, had the Government taken action on schools when it should have? The National Audit Office in 2017 published a report on capital spending that stated that it would cost £6.7 billion to return all schools to a satisfactory or better condition. That report was also clear that there is a significant risk of major costs arising from deterioration of the estate.
Action was needed in 2017, but in November 2020, in the Government spending review, they allocated only £3.1 billion—less than half the amount of investment required just to keep buildings ticking over safely. Then the story becomes even more absurd: in March 2022, realising that there was a problem, the Department for Education sent a questionnaire to all schools asking if they had RAAC on their estate, but later told schools not to spend any money on surveys to find out.
Even after that, in May 2022, when Government documents were leaked to The Observer showing that school buildings could be a risk to life—causing great alarm in schools up and down the country—half the schools then applied for funding to remediate and did not get a penny from Government. In June 2023, the National Audit Office said the condition of school buildings was “declining” and warned that 700,000 pupils were learning in buildings that it described as unsafe or ageing. It stated clearly that the DfE had received significantly less funding for school buildings than it estimated it needed between 2016 and 2023.
The Government knew that this crisis was coming, and the causes of this crisis were very deliberate. Austerity is, was and always will be a political choice, but it is both immoral and economically illiterate. The only political choice the Government should have made was to ensure the safety of their people. Sadly, if they had made that choice, the cost borne then would be a mere shadow of the cost required today.
To assist with guidance, I will put a seven-minute limit on.
(2 years, 10 months ago)
Commons ChamberWe have taken steps forward on regulating accommodation. We are working closely with the sector. We are going further than we ever have before to make sure that we can have not only quality accommodation for some of our most vulnerable children, but quality of care too. I know that the hon. Lady cares deeply about this issue, and I would be delighted to meet her to discuss it further.
Closing the attainment gap between disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged pupils has been the guiding star leading all our education reforms since 2010. Central to that has been ensuring that children are taught to read in the first years of primary school using systematic phonics, the method that all the evidence says is the most effective way to teach children to read. In PIRLS, the progress in international reading literacy study of the reading ability of nine-year-olds, England rose from joint 10th to joint eighth in 2016, which is largely attributable to improvements in reading by the least able children.
The Minister paints a rosy picture, but the disadvantage gap continues to be wider than it was in 2019 and the Government have limited the uptake of education recovery programmes, such as the national tutoring programme, and failed to ensure that tutoring was always directed towards the most disadvantaged pupils. Worse still, they have provided less than a third of the funding that their own education recovery commissioner recommended. Will the Minister commit today to increasing funding to meet these urgent needs?
During the eight years prior to the pandemic, the disadvantage gap closed by 13% in primary schools and by 9% in secondary schools by 2019. The hon. Lady is right that the gap widened over the course of the pandemic, which is why we introduced the national tutoring programme, providing intensive one-to-one and small group tuition to those who have fallen behind. It is why altogether we are spending £5 billion on an ambitious multi-year education recovery plan, why the recovery premium is targeted towards the most disadvantaged and why the pupil premium, introduced by the Conservative-led Government in 2010, is being increased from £2.6 billion to £2.9 billion this year.
(4 years, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberMy right hon. Friend is a strong advocate on these issues. The SEND review and the schools White Paper will, naturally, have to go hand in glove. The School Standards Minister and I would be happy to meet my right hon. Friend to discuss this further.
The Department has extended the covid workforce fund to at least the February half-term, so that schools with high absence and financial pressures can continue to access these additional funds. Other measures include asking former teachers to come forward if they are available to temporarily fill absences in schools during the spring term.
On 20 January, more than 415,000 pupils were off school and 15% of teachers were absent, but only 9,000 air purifiers have been promised, for approximately 300,000 classrooms. The Minister lauds the Government response, yet Germany has promised to subsidise 80% of the cost of air cleaning equipment in all schools to ensure that education is not disrupted. Why is he failing to ensure that our pupils have similar levels of protection?
Very simply, because we are taking an evidence-based approach. We have listened to schools and we sent them the carbon dioxide monitors so that they can monitor where classrooms need the extra support. About 3% of classrooms needed that extra support and they are the ones where the devices are being provided entirely funded by the Department.
(4 years, 4 months ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Ghani. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham East (Nadia Whittome) for securing this important debate. I also thank Teach the Future for its superb campaigning work on this issue, and the young people who are here today and are not only involved with Teach the Future, but were instrumental in the school strikes of a few years ago, which led Parliament to declare a climate and ecological emergency.
I am sure all hon. Members here today are aware that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report argues that we need a code red response to a code red emergency. That response should be reflected not only in our approach to decarbonising industry, energy use and developing a sustainable economy, but in our approach to climate change and sustainability, and the skills needed for the new future we deserve must be embedded in our education system. Sadly, however, the report card on climate education that Education International has just produced, based on its analysis of 73 updated nationally determined contributions presented for COP26, has found that no country is doing enough to meet the criteria, and the UK comes in 42nd out of 73.
As the country leading COP26—the most pivotal and important conference of the parties so far—that is not good enough, especially when the UK is still off track on meeting many of its carbon targets and the amount of investment pledged to decarbonise our economy so far is pitiful in comparison to many other industrial nations. Sadly, only last week the Government were mired in controversy after opposing an amendment to the Environment Bill that would have restricted the pumping of raw sewage into our water systems. That does not give the impression of a Government that is serious about tackling the climate and ecological emergency. However, we have cross-party consensus today, and the Minister can do his part in changing that perception.
As the Minister may know, education unions wrote to the Education Secretary last week and requested that he make four key announcements before the COP. First, they called for a comprehensive review of the entire curriculum, so that it is preparing and mobilising our whole system for a sustainable future. Secondly, as an interim measure, the Government should support the private Member’s Bill of Lord Knight of Weymouth, which would restore sustainability as a pillar of the curriculum. Thirdly, they called for a comprehensive plan to decarbonise the entire school estate by 2030 as part of an overdue refurbishment and repair programme. Finally, a detailed policy on green travel for students, staff and parents should be developed.
As the Minister knows, it is the next generation who will bear the brutal costs of inaction on climate change. We have a moral duty to secure their future and, as a nation, to lead the world at COP26. I am sure that the Minister agrees, and I hope he will implement the requests I have set out as a matter of urgency.
(5 years ago)
Commons ChamberIt is important that we do everything we can to help all children, right across the country. That is why, especially through working with the Education Endowment Foundation, the guidance and the evidence is freely available and exists to support all schools, whether they are state schools or private schools. We will always ensure that that evidence, information, and very best guidance and best practice are available for schools in the private sector as well as the state sector.
We have seen a road map back to education done on the back of an envelope, and today—only weeks from exam season—it appears that detailed exam guidance will not be available until the end of the spring term. There is nothing concrete to account for differentials in lost learning, no details on the quality assurance process, nor any on how schools and colleges will be supported with the grading process at the same time as helping pupils to catch up. Will the Secretary of State recognise that he needs to bring forward detailed guidance this week so that pupils and teachers can adequately plan? If he does not, I fear that he is walking us into yet another shambles.
It is always lovely to hear from the hon. Lady; I thank her very much for her comments. We have set out a comprehensive plan for the return of pupils to education, which is, let’s face it, something that she will always be opposed to. She seems to think that the only thing that a school should do is be shut. In her time on the Front Bench and on the Back Benches, she has never taken up the baton for children in order to campaign for them to be in school. She seems to take the view that they are best at home. That is not the view of Government Members.
(5 years, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberMy hon. Friend has been a great champion, defending his schools and doing everything he can to ensure that parents in his constituency benefit from being able to have access to their schools, but he makes an important point about clarity. I hope that what we have set out today brings a lot of clarity. The further detailed consultation that Ofqual will roll out in the early part of next week will be the next stage of consulting schools on the next steps. We recognise that, when that is fully completed, it is really important that we support schools, the teaching profession, and colleges and lecturers in those next steps and the awarding of grades in the summer for A-levels, GCSEs, and other vocational and technical qualifications.
Despite serious safety concerns, we were told yesterday that BTECs were still going ahead, only to be told late last night that it was simply up to schools and colleges to decide whether it was safe. The Secretary of State ignored education unions and organisations when they repeatedly told him that it was not safe to reopen schools, colleges and nurseries on Monday, and nurseries are still open in full today, despite widespread anger and disbelief in the sector and without any robust scientific evidence from the Secretary of State that nurseries will not act as a vector for transmission of the virus.
Safety is the Secretary of State’s responsibility. Up to one in 50 people now have the virus, and the number continues to climb. Will he now listen to education unions and organisations, cancel BTEC exams, urgently take the same safety approach on nurseries as he has done with schools, and provide upgraded risk assessment guidance and vaccine access to all settings that are currently open to vulnerable and key worker children?
May I say what a delight it is to have the hon. Member for Stretford and Urmston (Kate Green) as shadow Secretary of State? At least she seems to be enthusiastic about having children in schools, colleges and other settings, unlike the previous shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Salford and Eccles (Rebecca Long Bailey).
At every stage—I think the hon. Lady understands this—we have put the safety and security of children and the workforce at the very heart of what we do. As the chief medical officers not just of England, but of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have said, the best place for children is in school, but we have had to take unprecedented action as a result of the advice from the chief medical officer for England that the nation had to move to covid alert level 5. When the decision was taken on Monday to move to covid alert level 5, it was right that additional actions were taken, as reluctant as I was to see us in that position.
I think it is a little unfair of the hon. Lady to imply that the safety and security of staff and children are not at the heart of all our actions. They are at the heart of all our actions, but we know that children benefit from being in school and having the opportunity to sit in front of their teacher in the classroom. That is why Conservative Members have always been so enthusiastic for schools to have children in. I hope that she will eventually become a convert to that idea, as her successor has done.
(5 years, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberMy hon. Friend makes an important point about vaccination roll-out. We have also been doing testing pilots around the country to see how we can be in the best possible position so that, if a child does have covid, it does not mean that a large group of children will have to self-isolate. As we complete those pilots, we will look at how we can roll that out, especially into the areas that have been most affected. He makes an important point on vaccination, and we are certainly looking at how we can prioritise that, since teachers and support staff play such an important role in our national endeavour.
The Secretary of State’s statement sadly does little to address the disadvantage that pupils, particularly from northern schools, have faced compared with those in other areas less affected by the virus. Alarmingly, a survey of National Education Union members found that nearly 80% felt that they would not be able, in the time available and with repeated pupil absences, to teach the whole syllabus. At the very least, will he accept that to give pupils a real chance, he must release those topics that will be on exam papers now and not wait until the end of January?
It is very nice to see the hon. Lady again. The reason for this focus and the advance notice for schools is so that, where there has been missed time, they are able to be in a position to focus on the areas that matter. I appreciate that she would want everything yesterday, as against in January, but the work will take a little bit of time for exam boards to pull together. It will be done swiftly—by the end of January—to give schools as much space as possible to focus their attention on those areas.
(5 years, 8 months ago)
Commons ChamberI share the Secretary of State’s comments about James Furlong and send my condolences to his family and to all those who were affected by the horrific events in Reading on Saturday. I also echo the comments made by my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting) about Fred Jarvis, the former general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, who recently passed away at the ripe old age of 95.
Last Thursday evening, the Government issued a press release clearly stating that £700 million would be
“shared across early years, schools and 16 to 19 providers”.
Of course, it was not the strategic national education plan that I and many across the sector were hoping for, but it was a start none the less and I welcomed it. Less than an hour later, the Government amended the press release: the funding was not for early years and 16 to 19; it was £650 million, not £700 million; and it would not be available until September. Now I hear that schools will need to find 25% of the tuition funding themselves. I ask the Secretary of State: what on earth happened?
I was getting rather optimistic that the hon. Lady would say that she believed it was safe for children for go back to school, but she missed out on the opportunity. The difference between our scheme and the hon. Lady’s is that ours will deliver results and make a difference. Our scheme is for £1 billion extra to go to schools and for £350 million to be targeted at children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds. It will close the gap in terms of attainment much more effectively than any of the Labour party’s proposals. It would be nice if the hon. Lady welcomed such proposals.
Can I just say that it is the Opposition who ask the questions, not the other way round?
Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Secretary of State did not listen to my question—indeed, he does not listen very often at all.
Geoff Barton from the Association of School and College Leaders said:
“It remains frustrating that we haven’t had the opportunity to discuss any of this with the government ahead of this announcement and that we once again find ourselves having to guess the detail.”
There were no details on resource for early years, 16 to 19, summer provision or emotional and mental health support; there were no plans to source additional school space, to streamline GCSEs and A-levels or to roll out blended learning; and there was no promise to extend free laptops to all children who do not have them, rather than just the groups who have been identified by the Government.
All of this uncertainty could have been avoided if the Secretary of State had chosen to listen to the sector. Will he confirm that he will now formally convene a taskforce of trade unions, education and childcare leaders and staff, local authorities, parents’ organisations and health experts to address these issues urgently?
Order. It would be easier if we could try to make questions shorter. There are other shadow Ministers to come and we have lots of other Members; I do not want them to miss out, because they blame me.