Pride Month

Sarah Dyke Excerpts

Thursday 4th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

I thank all hon. Members who have contributed to the debate. It is always a pleasure to speak on behalf of His Majesty’s loyal Opposition. It has been a thoughtful, emotional and wide-ranging debate. The Minister’s opening speech highlighted her joy at being at the Dispatch Box. Her story reminded us that so much has been delivered by people like her, who we all know locally and nationally, who continue to do so much. She spoke about hope and unity over division and hate.

I am always so proud to share the Opposition Dispatch Box with my right hon. Friend the Member for Daventry (Stuart Andrew). He spoke about how we balance trans people’s rights and women’s rights, and how we talk about dignity, respect, compassion and love. He speaks from such personal experience, I am so proud to share this debate with him and I am sorry he cannot be here for the closing of it.

The hon. Member for Glasgow North (Martin Rhodes) spoke powerfully about how Pride is a place. It was a beautiful speech, and I thank him for sharing it.

Pride should be an opportunity not only to celebrate LBGT people across our society but to recognise those who have lived with discrimination throughout history and to reflect honestly, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Daventry did when he talked about his younger life. We have done that today when addressing the disparities that remain. We continue to renew our commitment to ensuring that Britain maintains its long and proud tradition of liberty and tolerance, and that we are truly one of the best places in the world to live as a LGBT person. We all want and need it to stay that way.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I know that you are particularly excited to be at Romsey’s own mini-Pride, the One Romsey festival, next weekend, which is now celebrating its second year—it is maybe a chance for you not to wear black.

The Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, the hon. Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen), was powerful in her position and her thoughts, as always. She mentioned that equalities debates always take place on a Thursday. I love being here on a Thursday— I would be here every day of the week if they let me—but I agree that it is challenging for some of our colleagues to join us. I agreed with her statement that it is not one or the other in terms of rights—I have never thought that.

It was important that the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) spoke about the time people need to experiment with who they are and who they want to be. I wanted to be Madonna, Kim Wilde and Debbie Harry when growing up. Guess what, I still want to be—you can tell from the black eyeliner. The hon. Lady’s speech was a reminder that we all go through stages, and that we need to give young people the space to learn. I really appreciated her speaking up in that way.

My party, and society more broadly, has gone through a profound shift in attitudes in recent decades. I will point out a few examples of that shift, and the pride that we have in our party: the election of Ruth Davidson—with apologies to the hon. Member for Aberdeen North—who was the first openly gay leader of a mainstream political party and brought so much to politics in Scotland; Justine Greening, the first openly lesbian Cabinet member; and the ennoblement of my friend, Debbie Stedman-Scott, an outstanding public servant and colleague.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

The hon. Member rightly says that much progress has been made towards equality across the LGBT family, and that many lesbians are now standing and being prominent voices in the political sphere. However, lesbian voices are so often under-represented in politics. We face distinct challenges in political representation, and in ensuring our particular social and economic experiences are reflected in policy. Will the hon. Member join me in my call to encourage more lesbians—and more people from across the LGBT+ community—to stand for elections at whatever level of local or national Government they choose?

[Mims Davies]

I am going to make the exact point that the hon. Lady raises in my later remarks, so I wholeheartedly agree with her. My colleagues have succeeded on merit, but, to the hon. Lady’s point, they were asked to step forward, be part of things and stand. They did not rely on their identity; it was talent, dedication and leadership. That is in everybody, however we identify.

As has been said many times in this debate, who someone loves should not affect their success. There should be no barrier to someone’s success and ambition, and who someone loves should not be the measure of what their ambition or success can be. Pride is there for everyone to be represented equally and for us not to be divided. Safe, fair and equal is true equality for all of us.

I am concerned that in some quarters, as has been raised today, Pride is not being used to unite; instead, it is being used to inflame tensions. It is important that we recognise that. Let us be honest: we saw this, in a way, with Monday’s statement, when we heard speaker after speaker saying that the EHRC code of practice is exclusionary and anti-trans. We have heard some of that today. I fundamentally do not believe that, although I acknowledge that some people have said that today and that they do believe it. That is, of course, the reality of this place. I reiterate that I believe that that characterisation is not correct. The Equality Act remains clear in its protections, including those related to gender reassignment. The code reinforces rather than diminishes those protections. It is important, as I think we all agree, that the code works and that it does not diminish wide-ranging, hard-fought rights. Of course, it reflects on other areas, such as age and disability.

It is striking that in the debate earlier this week we did not roundly acknowledge the importance of lesbianism, which the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) has just referred to, and the fact that the code needs to work for same-sex groups, particularly lesbian organisations. I have spoken about this before. These groups have often found themselves at the sharp end of an increasingly fraught debate about the relationship between biological sex, gender identity and sexual orientation. There have been credible reports of lesbian groups being deplatformed, pressured or silenced simply for asserting their same-sex attraction. That is the reality for some women. The fact that in 2024—just a couple of years ago—a representative of the LGB Alliance was required to offer a legal definition of the term “lesbian” in court is still, frankly, extraordinary.

The situation reflects a wider confusion that risks eroding hard-won protections. We should be wary— I think we have all said that in the Chamber this afternoon—of repeating past mistakes of marginalising and dismissing same-sex attraction in particular. As we heard from my right hon. Friend the Member for Daventry, lesbian women played a vital role during the AIDS crisis in supporting gay men during some of the most difficult chapters of our history. That solidarity should never be forgotten, and neither should it be replaced with division.

I know that some Members in the House are supporting the measures in early-day motion 240. I believe they are doing so because they have not necessarily fully appreciated the implications for women’s rights, particularly for lesbians who rely on the clarity of law to maintain their safe single-sex spaces. I welcome the thoughtful speech made by the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Tim Roca), in which he covered his views and approach to that. I think that does accord. It is clear from what has been discussed around the code of practice that it is vital that healthcare for all matters. That is absolutely something we need to look at.

On flags, I personally think we need less tribalism and more grown-up and pragmatic conversations. We can and must protect women’s rights, respect trans rights and find workable solutions. I do not think we should be arguing about flags. We can stand up for people, communities and, crucially, harmony. The Conservatives do that through the LGBT+ Conservatives. I am going to invite the hon. Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) out on the best night ever—once again, a Conservative willing to let him come out on the best night ever.

The Conservative party roundly believes that everyone should be treated equally before the law, regardless of their race, sex or sexual orientation.

Oral Answers to Questions

Sarah Dyke Excerpts

Monday 19th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Georgia Gould]

I thank my hon. Friend and other colleagues who came to see me a few weeks ago about this issue and the impact it is having on their communities. We continue to work with the trust. The work of multi-academy trusts is crucial for children, families and school staff, and it is right that they are subject to transparent accountability. We are delivering our manifesto commitment by legislating to introduce Ofsted inspections of academy trusts and related intervention powers for the Secretary of State, which will support strong governance across the sector, ensuring that the interests of children always come first.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

Pressures on schools to convert to academy trusts are considerable and widespread, but academising at all costs is not always in everybody’s interests. Some parents in Glastonbury and Somerton have told me that they are concerned that where decisions are taken across a number of schools, performance could diminish as a result. What steps is the Minister taking to monitor trusts and hold them accountable, especially where a school that has joined with an academy has failed to improve?

[Georgia Gould]

I have seen real benefits from collaboration in saving money and sharing best practice to support children in their learning. However, as I have just set out, it is crucial that there is strong accountability, and we are legislating to bring in inspections for multi-academy trusts to ensure that there is strong governance and accountability.

Oral Answers to Questions

Sarah Dyke Excerpts

Monday 1st December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising her concern. We are working with the Home Office and with colleagues across Government in developing the child poverty strategy. We will focus on ensuring that vulnerable children are protected and their welfare is safeguarded, and that vulnerable migrant children receive the support they require.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

Rural areas have deep pockets of deprivation, and nearly 18% of children in Glastonbury and Somerton live in poverty. How will the Minister ensure that the child poverty strategy sufficiently focuses on child poverty in rural areas?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I recognise the particular challenges faced by many rural communities, and I am grateful to the hon. Lady for raising them. We have been considering such matters through the development of the strategy. The taskforce has been working across Government, including with colleagues in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, to understand some of the challenges. We are expanding childcare and new free breakfast clubs, and the lifting of the two-child limit will make a big difference to children and their life chances in every corner of our country.

Children with SEND: Assessments and Support

Sarah Dyke Excerpts

Monday 15th September 2025 Westminster Hall

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

It is an honour to serve with you in the Chair, Dr Huq, and a privilege to follow the powerful speech of the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft). I thank all the petitioners, including the 221 from Glastonbury and Somerton.

As vice-chair of the f40 group, which represents the worst-funded 43 local education authorities in the country, I have spoken many times about the broken SEND system. It is adversarial, fails the most vulnerable children and puts councils on the brink of bankruptcy. Caroline from North Cadbury recently wrote to me regarding her daughter, Lucy, whom she described as an “intelligent and capable girl” who is on track to do well in her GCSEs but has been left to fall through the cracks. She told me:

“The very systems that are supposed to support her are, in fact, ignoring her.”

Lucy has autism and challenges with her mental health, and she has had a long wait for a diagnosis and is fighting for an EHCP.

I recently spoke to the director of education at Somerset council. She told me that it costs the council £6,000 to create an EHCP and that the number of EHCP applications is up 26%. EHCPs are not one size fits all. They were developed to provide a long-term plan for relatively stable conditions, but children with social, emotional and mental health issues and behavioural challenges do not have stable conditions. Therefore, an EHCP is not always the right solution, but it is the only solution for children and young people that is presented to parents and schools. Changing an EHCP requires a full consultation process, which is arduous, expensive and time consuming—a structural barrier that is impeding common sense. It often does not matter whether a child has an EHCP if the school they attend is not equipped to provide the support outlined in the plan.

We are all awaiting the publication of the Government’s schools White Paper. We need clarity, and I hope that the Minister will outline that today. If these priorities are not central to the system, we will continue to fail a generation of children. We need to recognise diversity and provide the education of the future now.

Early Years Providers: Government Support

Sarah Dyke Excerpts

Wednesday 9th July 2025 Westminster Hall

[Michelle Welsh (Sherwood Forest) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered Government support for early years providers.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Pritchard. I requested today’s debate on Government support for early years providers because too often the early years are left out of the discussion on education, and the impacts that they have on children’s lives and futures are not always given the respect that they deserve. I agreed with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State during Monday’s statement when she called early years providers

“the hidden heroes of our communities.”—[Official Report, 7 July 2025; Vol. 770, c. 682.]

I am determined to see them hidden no longer.

Just over a year ago, I made the decision to stand to be a Member of Parliament because I believe that where people start in life should not determine where they end and what opportunities they should have. I spent many years in Nottinghamshire and Derby setting up Sure Start centres under the previous Labour Government. Then I had to watch Sure Start centres being dismantled and the most disadvantaged children having their support ripped away from them. That is the very thing that drove me to stand to be a Member of Parliament.

The injustice should never have been allowed to happen, and it is time to deal with the legacy of 14 years of a Conservative Government. In the UK, 4.5 million children are living in poverty; there are more than 4,000 in my constituency of Sherwood Forest. Almost 2.2 million children are on free school meals—just over one in four children in England. Half of those children will not reach a good level of development by the age of five. According to the Sutton Trust, the attainment gap between children on free school meals and their peers has widened to 20%.

Before I was elected, I worked with vulnerable children and I saw day in and day out how influential a child’s start in life can be on their future. I also saw how incredible Sure Start centres were in changing the lives of families in disadvantaged communities. I cannot express how excited I am to learn that the Government will be modelling their family hubs in a similar way and that they will be rooted in disadvantaged communities.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

Ellie from Wincanton in my constituency has autism spectrum disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and a specific learning disability. She was not diagnosed during her early education and did not have the support framework around her, so I am really pleased that the Government’s Best Start family hub expansion could help early identification, particularly of special educational needs and disabilities, but does the hon. Member agree that the strategy must be matched with sufficient funding, especially after the Tories trashed early years provision?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Smart]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that important intervention. We spend a lot of time talking about the gender balance in various industries. My hon. Friend spent time in the armed forces, and I know that the armed forces think long and hard about how they recruit and retain women in particular. Men are often really under-represented in early years education, in care settings, and so on, and they would have so much to add, particularly for those children who do not have many male role models at home or in their families. I look forward to the Minister commenting on that hugely important point, because he is the one in Government and will, I am sure, have all the answers.

Anybody who has had to spend time caring for multiple toddlers will know the skill, diligence, energy and resilience needed to do the job well. It is right that we expect high standards from our early years providers. High-quality early years education is crucial for ensuring that children from any background can go on to achieve their potential. However, many nurseries across Stockport and, indeed, across the country will find it difficult to improve or even maintain their good and outstanding ratings as their finances continue to be squeezed.

[Sarah Dyke]

I think my hon. Friend is coming to an important point that I want to make, too. I recently met Acorn childcare in Somerton, another brilliant women-led nursery in my constituency. Staff there have told me over and over again that they are really struggling with the unsustainable costs and the funding model that is being implemented, plus the free entitlement that they now have to deal with. The spiralling costs are becoming uncontrollable. Does my hon. Friend agree that we must review the rates paid to providers to ensure that they cover the actual costs of delivering good-quality childcare?

[Lisa Smart]

I completely agree that the funding model for early years and nurseries must be sustainable. We do not want to see the business model becoming no longer viable, so that these wonderful providers that give children the best start in life can no longer continue to exist.

There have been Government announcements on the provider agreement, and announcements about how any shortfall in funding can be met by only voluntary contributions. There have also been announcements about staffing ratios. My view—the hon. Member for Sherwood Forest laid out this point really well—is that such announcements do very little to support the quality of provision or staff retention.

For context, private providers across Stockport have told me that since 1999 they have experienced a 250% increase in wages, which is a good thing, but that is in comparison to a funding increase of only 83%. Those two things do not add up. Early years settings are having to deal with the increasingly complex situations that many children face at home, whether that is their special educational needs and disabilities or different situations. The hon. Member for Sherwood Forest was absolutely right to take about far too many children living in poverty, which clearly has a knock-on impact on all education and early years settings. It is important that we restate our request that the Government look at the two-child benefit cap when they make decisions about future planning.

I am approaching my 20th year as a primary school governor, and I am acutely aware of the shared challenges and issues facing children and educators across all settings. If we want to see our young people thrive, the Government must commit to a sustainable funding model for early years care. They must also recognise the true cost of providing high-quality childcare, and not add more pressures to young parents already struggling with the cost of living. I ask the Government to recognise the increasing financial burden on parents, and to understand that proper funding for early years education is really an investment in our children’s and our society’s future.

Adoption and Kinship Placements

Sarah Dyke Excerpts

Tuesday 20th May 2025 Westminster Hall

[Caroline Voaden (South Devon) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. I congratulate my constituency neighbour, the hon. Member for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith) on securing this debate and on her excellent speech.

We know that adopted children are often the most traumatised in our society. The abuse, neglect and instability that they have endured in their earliest years leave lasting scars, affecting their development, their ability to trust and their mental health. With the right support, those children can heal. Therapy gives them a second chance to feel safe, to build meaningful relationships and to lead stable, loving lives.

Let us take the example of Leo, an eight-year-old boy who lost his parents and two siblings and now lives with his special guardian under a special guardianship order due to his assessed psychological need for permanence. Leo also has a diagnosis of autism spectrum condition, and experienced complex trauma within his birth home during the first few years of his life. Thanks to support from the fund, Leo and his special guardian mum have been accessing specialist psychotherapy. The progress that he has made has been remarkable. He is now able to share his sadness and ask for comfort when he feels overwhelmed—a huge step for a child who used to shut down completely and express distress through challenging behaviour.

Leo’s case highlights why early therapeutic intervention is so crucial. However, due to recent cuts and delays in the ASGSF funding, Leo has been waiting five months to continue his therapy, which is critical work focused on processing the complex grief of losing his entire birth family. The interruption in therapy is more than just a pause—it risks undoing much of the progress Leo has made. Rebuilding trust with his therapist will take time, and the delay may trigger deep feelings of abandonment, undermining his already fragile belief that adults can be safe and consistent. Even when therapy resumes, the reduced number of sessions now available is unlikely to be enough to fully support Leo through his grief. A child such as Leo does not need a quick fix; he needs time, skilled support and consistency to help him to heal.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

My hon. Friend is telling the heartwarming story of her constituent. Two constituents of mine, Liz and Steve from Wincanton, have recently become the special guardians for their grandchild. They faced a long-drawn-out process as a result of the delays to the adoption and special guardianship support fund, and they have really struggled to get the support they need. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government should urgently reverse these harmful cuts and reaffirm their commitment to supporting vulnerable children?

[Caroline Voaden]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend.

When children like Leo receive the right early help, they are more likely to thrive in school, avoid crisis services and grow into adults who contribute positively to society. Supporting those children gives them a second chance at life, and ultimately it also saves money. That is why the fund was created in 2015. Early therapeutic intervention can be transformative and much more cost-effective than dealing with complex problems later in life.

Demand is growing—in 2023, 38% of families reported reaching a crisis point, up from 30% in 2022—yet therapists fear that recent funding changes will reduce the number of children they can support. Some are already leaving the field. Families are growing wary, hesitant to invest in assessments and worrying that they will not have enough left for therapy or that funding will run out entirely. I have met one therapist who says she will be able to see fewer children, not more, because of the reduction in funding.

Quality of care is also at risk. Limited budgets may push families toward cheaper providers, who lack the specialist expertise needed to work safely with traumatised children. Many effective therapeutic models just cannot be delivered within the reduced budgets and fewer sessions. The long-term costs of underfunding are enormous. Without proper support, placements may break down, forcing vulnerable children back into the care system. We cannot let that happen. Restoring sustainable ASGSF funding is essential. Every child like Leo deserves the chance to heal, and that starts with the right support at the right time.

Dedicated Schools Grant

Sarah Dyke Excerpts

Tuesday 6th May 2025 Westminster Hall

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to speak in this important debate and to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Butler. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Tewkesbury (Cameron Thomas) on securing the debate and on his powerful speech. I alert Members to my position as one of the vice chairs of the f40 group, which represents 43 local authorities with historically low funding for education and campaigns for fairer funding for schools and SEND provision.

Somerset is one of those 43 councils. Its 2025-26 dedicated schools grant allocation is just £8,500 per student, while some councils get nearly £5,000 more than that per pupil. The launch in 2018 of the national funding formula for mainstream schools introduced a minimum per pupil funding level, which was designed to level up funding. However, that has continued to lock in historical funding elements, preventing some local authority areas from receiving more funding. The Liberal Democrats understand the need for regional variation to ensure that schools can operate successfully, but that should not come at the expense of schools elsewhere, which often struggle to make ends meet.

As other Members have stated, the DSG is made up of four blocks, one of which is the high needs block, which supports SEND provision for children in both mainstream and specialist schools. Somerset’s 2025-2026 allocation of high-needs block funding is £1,250 per student—more than £2,000 less than the highest-funded local authority. It has been stressed many times that the SEND system is broken; the variance and unequal DSG funding is a big reason for that. My inbox, like that of many other Members, is full of correspondence from parents who all desperately want the best education for their children, but are concerned and deeply upset that their children’s needs are not being met by their schools.

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

My area of Harrogate and Knaresborough is covered by North Yorkshire council, which is part of f40, which my hon. Friend mentioned. On high-needs funding, we are 146th out of 151. That is causing real challenges in that rural setting, with children sometimes having to travel for hours to get to school. Does my hon. Friend share my concerns about those low levels of funding, which are compounded by the cut to the rural services delivery grant that local authorities receive?

[Sarah Dyke]

I will touch on that. Delivering education in a huge rural county has so many pressures and complexities and my hon. Friend is absolutely right to bring that up.

Let me give a couple of examples of children who are suffering and whose educational needs are not being met in my constituency of Glastonbury and Somerton. One of them is Jensen from Ilchester. He is only seven years old, but has been experiencing severe mental health distress while awaiting a long overdue neurodevelopmental assessment. His mother told me that he has lost all enjoyment in life. He misses his education and his friends, and all the while he is being passed between services. Jensen is not alone in that situation.

Many other children in Glastonbury and Somerton face similar challenges: Charlie from Castle Cary, for example. He has an EHCP, but his school is simply not able to meet his needs. His mother said that he has been left for months without his educational needs, as specified in his EHCP, being met. As a result, his behaviour at school and his mental health are declining. The differential in DSG funding means that children like Jensen, Charlie and many others heartbreakingly cannot get the support that they deserve. Families are being left to suffer alone, fighting a system that is just not working for them.

We know that the system is broken. The Isos report released last year found that all actors within the system are behaving rationally—schools, councils and parents—but the system is just not up to scratch. The funding model needs to be reformed to make it more responsive to changes so that individual schools can receive funding based on need. I urge the Minister to consider reviewing the funding formulas for both schools and high needs.

The Liberal Democrats have a plan to invest in our education sector above the rate of inflation so that we can ensure that all schools have the capacity to operate sustainably. We must also give our local authorities the financial support that they need. The previous Conservative Government left schools to crumble and forced councils to do more with less, impacting our children’s education. The persistent budgetary strain does not allow local authorities to create long-term plans for children with SEND, so we would also set up a dedicated national body for SEND to act as a champion for children with complex needs and ensure that they receive tailored support.

Without major reforms and changes to funding, we will continue to see a landscape with uneven funding where children are badly let down and schools cannot provide the support that is needed. I urge the Minister to take action, invest in education, invest in our children and invest in our future.

--- Later in debate ---

[Catherine McKinnell]

The hon. Gentleman makes his point well.

As a Government, we are determined that local authorities will be able to deliver those high-quality services for children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities, but in a financially sustainable way. Those two elements go hand in hand to create a stronger and more prosperous future for children and families. Many hon. Members have spoken about their constituents’ experiences, and we recognise that too many families and children are not experiencing the quality of SEND services and provision that they should expect, and that the rising cost of SEND provision is putting a significant strain on both local authority and school finances.

[Sarah Dyke]

The Minister describes the additional funding but, as I have explained, many parents and children are suffering with severe mental health issues; it is heartbreaking to see. The Liberal Democrats want to provide a dedicated mental health professional in every school, so that every child and parent has somebody to turn to when they need it. What steps are the Government putting in place to support parents and children who are facing mental health challenges?

[Catherine McKinnell]

The hon. Lady identifies an important issue. Yes, we have a big challenge in relation to special educational needs and disabilities, but we also face much wider challenges relating to young people’s mental health right across our school system. The Government are committed to ensuring that we have mental health professionals in every school and community so that children and families can get that support, whether it be within a school setting or outside if that is where they want to access it.

Hon. Members will appreciate that the spending review is ongoing. It is due to conclude in June, but our objective is to ensure that local authorities, schools and colleges can deliver high-quality services for children and young people with SEND. We will set out in more detail how local authorities will deal with their historical deficits as part of that consideration.

I again thank the hon. Member for Tewkesbury for bringing this matter forward, and all those who contributed to what has been a very thoughtful debate. I think there is a large amount of consensus on what we want to achieve for children and young people: getting the best outcomes from our dedicated schools grant. The Government have made clear our commitment to addressing the challenges as part of supporting children and young people to achieve and thrive. I am determined that progress will be made.

I want to give my final word of thanks to all those who work in our school system in the interests of our children and young people, in Gloucestershire and across the country. Indeed, I realise I meant to come back to my hon. Friend the Member for Hexham to particularly commend the staff at Prudhoe community high school, who have been working incredibly hard to minimise the impact on the children and young people who are taking their GCSEs, A-levels, BTECs, T-levels and all the assessments going on this summer. We know that school leaders and teachers are working tirelessly, regardless of any debate we have in this place about school funding or otherwise, to deliver the best outcomes for the children in their area. They should know that they have a Government who are on their side, who will support them to deliver that, despite the very challenging economic circumstances that we have inherited. We need to deliver the very best for all our children and young people. We have pledged to review the funding system to help to support and achieve that.

Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund

Sarah Dyke Excerpts

Tuesday 1st April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Janet Daby]

We will continue to support adopted children. According to the Adoption and Children Act 2002, there is a statutory duty for local authorities to do that and we will continue to ensure that we carry through with our children’s social care reforms.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) for securing this urgent question. Zach and Iesha were placed in the care of my amazing caseworker, Sammie, nine years ago. They had a really hard start in life and were shortly due to start receiving trauma therapy and life story work. I am really pleased that it seems that work and their journey can continue. However, does the Minister recognise the burden for families of being put on hold for so long? Will she confirm that support will go forward, beyond this year?

[Janet Daby]

As I have already said, this Government have no intention of getting rid of the funding in future years. It is down there in law that support needs to be given to adoptive families and, indeed, we are giving that support to children placed in special guardianships and to kinship carers.

Apprenticeships

Sarah Dyke Excerpts

Tuesday 4th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Andrew Pakes]

I agree 100% with my hon. Friend. As we have discussed previously, we both want to make sure that jobs in theatre, the arts and creative industries are open to young people in our constituencies and across the country.

We were the first country to pass a national apprenticeship Act when the Tudor Parliament enacted the Statute of Artificers in 1563. It is mind-boggling to think how much our society and economy have changed since then. What has not changed is the timeless requirement of educating the next generation, and ensuring that novices in the jobs market are set forth in the working world with all the pride and self-reliance of mastering a new occupation, profession or skill.

Over the past few years, there have been various reports into the status, scale and success of apprenticeships. It is clear that the system is not working as it should be. In my view, it is a national disgrace that the number of apprenticeships fell under the last Government.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for securing this important debate at the start of National Apprenticeships Week. Apprenticeships are particularly important in rural areas such as Glastonbury and Somerton, because they provide a valuable pathway for young people to gain practical skills and go on to secure employment in their local communities. That helps to combat rural depopulation and boost the local economy. There is a conflict, however, because although apprenticeships are good, the levy is not. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the apprenticeship levy should be scrapped?

[Christine Jardine (in the Chair)]

Order. Before the hon. Member responds, I remind Members that a lot of people want to get in on this debate, and we need to keep questions much shorter in order to do that.

Education, Health and Care Plans

Sarah Dyke Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Marie Goldman]

I wholeheartedly agree that the system is completely broken and needs complete reform. I gently say to the Minister and anybody listening to the debate that the longer that reform takes, the more harmful it will be for children. Children are suffering right now because they are not getting the support they need. Children keep getting older; they do not wait for Governments to decide what they are going to do or for root-and-branch reforms. Children and their parents need the support right now. Although I would absolutely welcome a wholesale review and change, there are things we can do now to alleviate the problems. If the Minister takes away only one thing from the debate, I hope it is the plea for more to be done now and for the reform and implementation to be sped up. I will come in a bit to the things we can do.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

I thank my hon. Friend for securing this vital and important debate. She talks about inequality, and SEND funding is unequal across the country. Somerset council is part of the f40 group, which includes a number of the most poorly funded councils across the country. It received less than £8,000 in gross dedicated grant funding per mainstream pupil in 2024-25, which is more than £5,000 less than the best-funded local authorities. Does my hon. Friend agree that we must tackle this postcode lottery and urgently provide better support for some of our nation’s most vulnerable pupils?

[Marie Goldman]

Of course, and my hon. Friend raises an important point. We must tackle that inequality. The Government will say, “We put £1 billion of extra funding into special educational needs.” That is great—it is much better than no extra money for special educational needs—but it will not touch the sides. Local authorities are saying that they have a deficit in the high needs block of £3 billion, and some estimates say that that will go up to £8 billion in the near future. We are looking at a massive funding shortfall.