Government Support for Ukrainians

Tessa Munt Excerpts

Monday 21st July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Martin Wrigley]

The right hon. Gentleman has obviously been reading my speech. I shall get on to that shortly.

I have spoken to a Ukrainian lady and her elderly mother in Newton Abbot. This lady has lost her husband, her son and her father. Her home in Ukraine is in the Russian-occupied zone and, like much of her village, has been razed to the ground. Even when peace does break out, what does she have to go back to, other than landmines and unexploded bombs?

Ukraine is the home of the fabled Cossacks, and it is no wonder that the war was not over in the three weeks or so that Putin expected. However, that means that we have to think longer term about the Homes for Ukraine scheme visas. I mentioned that there are now some 7 million Ukrainians, out of the original population of 45 million, safely outside the country—that is 15%, or about one sixth in old money. It will not be practical for all of them to return to a country with a shattered infrastructure for a number of years. Clearing landmines, dealing with unexploded bombs, demolition and rebuilding must be done before most of the guests we have here could think about returning. My basic ask of the Minister and the Government is to look at a longer-term extension of the Homes for Ukraine scheme to give our guests certainty, in some part of their lives at least.

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

Could we ask the Minister for clarity about the women who have dependent children or elderly relatives, who are often unable to meet the income thresholds required under settlement routes such as the skilled worker visa or the global talent visa? Could we also ask for clarity for their children, who have learned English so that they are so fluent and who have had their education here, as they cannot look forward to going to college or university because they do not have a visa that will see them through that course?

[Martin Wrigley]

Very much so. In my meetings, people have been asking about these different visas and routes, not many of which work.

Water Safety Education

Tessa Munt Excerpts

Thursday 19th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for Southampton Itchen (Darren Paffey) for securing this important debate today. As we have heard, every year in the UK, more than 200 lives are lost to accidental drowning. In fact, it claims more lives each year in the UK than house fires or cycling accidents. That must be a wake-up call.

We have an opportunity and a responsibility in this House today to bring those numbers down. The problem is as clear as it is urgent: too many people grow up without being taught how to stay safe around water. Swimming must be a core life skill, as we have heard, and yet, according to the Royal Life Saving Society UK, one in three children leave primary school unable to swim properly. That statistic should concern us all. Of course, children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds are most likely to miss out. In other words, those at greatest risk are the least protected.

This is not just about learning to swim, although that is essential; it is about knowing what to do when things go wrong—when someone panics, when cold water shock sets in and when every second counts. Every summer, every bank holiday and every heatwave, like this week, the risk increases. Rivers, lakes, canals and coastlines become magnets for young people and far too often, lives are lost.

My constituency of Esher and Walton has seen three tragic drowning deaths in the past four years. Two of them occurred during the fierce heat of the summer of 2022—a heartbreaking testament to the risks that rise with each heatwave. These are tragedies with unimaginable pain for the families and profound effects for schools, emergency services and the wider community. As a river- based constituency, we owe it to our residents, visitors and local businesses to prioritise water safety. The risks are all around us, particularly this week. The Thames threads through our towns, the River Mole runs through our parks, and reservoirs sit at the heart of our communities. Addressing the root causes is so important.

One of my constituents, Nell Hickman, took up the cause by leading a local water safety campaign along a stretch of the Thames between Thames Ditton and Hampton Court, which I have heard referred to by school children as the Barbados of south-west London. Determined to prevent further tragedies, Nell partnered with the RNLI, Elmbridge borough council and other stakeholders. Together, they installed safety signage and emergency throwlines. They also expanded water safety training, advising swimmers to stay parallel to the riverbank instead of swimming across the River Thames. That is a powerful example of community-led action, backed by the right support, saving lives.

There is more that we can do. The RNLI plays a vital role in my constituency and I pay tribute to its tireless work. Some schools in Esher and Walton are already leading the way by teaching key life skills through personal, social, health and economic education and citizenship. However, we must do more to ensure that water safety is embedded in our children’s education, especially in areas such as mine, with rivers and open waters.

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

I am greatly pleased that this debate is taking place. In my constituency and within Somerset and North Somerset—the whole of Somerset—there are 8,463 miles of rivers, reans and streams which, from Somerset, would take us as far as Singapore. That level of water coverage presents a danger not only for those who swim and need to be taught to swim, but for young people, who should understand very clearly what to do should the vehicle in which they are travelling goes into water. There are specific rules around how to save ourselves if the car or vehicle we are in goes into water. Does my hon. Friend have a comment about that?

[Monica Harding]

I thank my hon. Friend for bringing attention to vehicles going into the water. In my constituency, the Thames provides our border with London, so it stretches along the entire constituency, and of course cars could go into the river.

In areas like ours where rivers and open water are a daily part of life, it is essential that our children are taught how to be safe in the water. Would the Minister consider ensuring that water safety is integrated into the secondary school curriculum, so that every young person leaves school equipped with these essential skills for their safety? It is now—in a heatwave when GCSEs and A levels have just finished—that our children are most at risk. I know that because this week I sensed that my 16-year-old after finishing his GCSEs was going to do just that, and it took all my parental bribery, frankly, to ensure that he did not.

Organisations like the Royal Life Saving Society, alongside the RNLI, provide expert guidance, from recognising dangerous currents and raising awareness of cold water shock to assisting people in distress in the river. By working with those partners, we can build a generation that is not only confident in the water, but capable of saving lives. These are not just water safety tools; they are universal lifesaving skills that can make all the difference in emergencies of all kinds.

Countries like Australia rightly treat water safety as a national priority. Children grow up surrounded by water there, so they are taught how to navigate it, just as our children are taught to wear seatbelts and how to cross the road. The UK, an island nation flowing with rivers, should be no different. Let us work towards a future where fewer families face heartbreak and finally make water safety a priority.

Special Educational Needs and Disabilities

Tessa Munt Excerpts

Thursday 24th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Catherine McKinnell]

My hon. Friend raises an important point: it is right that we require schools to provide inclusive mainstream education, and that we put in place the work- force, the training, and all the support that is necessary for that to be delivered. That is why one of our priorities is to have 6,500 more teachers within our teaching system, to ensure we have the specialist teachers that every child should have. We are looking at training; additional training support for special educational needs and disabilities has already been rolled out for the early years, and we want to ensure all schools have access to high-quality training that supports them to meet that need.

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

Demand for EHCPs for children in Somerset has tripled in six years, and the county’s SEND budget is forecast to be in deficit by £290 million in the next five years. Previously, Somerset spent, on average, £22,000 per child with an EHCP, but now that is £18,000. So this is not about overspending; it is about the increasing number of children needing help. As a start, could the Minister look at the current legislation, which lacks clear definitions of which children should be assessed or funded? This ambiguity, especially post covid, has led to a huge and rapid increase in the number of children needing support.

Oral Answers to Questions

Tessa Munt Excerpts

Thursday 26th February 2015 Commons Chamber

[Sajid Javid]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend, who has taken a strong interest in this matter. I have heard him speak in the House on behalf of his constituents on a number of occasions, and once again he comes up with an excellent idea, which we shall follow up.

[Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD)]

The Government’s own figures show that Somerset’s rate of access to superfast broadband is only 41%, which hardly meets the needs of rural businesses and residents. Connecting Devon and Somerset allows bids from other suppliers in the Dartmoor and Exmoor national parks, but I understand that, because of the reason of screening of information, only BT, as a monopoly supplier, will be able to bid for the second phase. I have written to the Competition and Markets Authority; will the Secretary of State do the same and investigate exactly what has happened?

[Sajid Javid]

As my hon. Friend raises a specific issue, I will have to take a closer look at it. I am glad that she has written to the Competition and Markets Authority, but if this is a competition issue, it should be dealt with by the independent regulator. However, if there is more that she thinks I can do, I shall take a closer look.

Post Office Mediation Scheme

Tessa Munt Excerpts

Wednesday 17th December 2014 Westminster Hall

[Mr Arbuthnot]

My hon. and learned Friend makes an interesting point. The thing that I am worried about most is that it is often impossible to find those flaws in the software that could have caused some of these problems. Second Sight’s interim report did not find major problems with the software, but as I said at the beginning that does not mean that such problems did not exist.

To my mind, the Post Office’s behaviour towards MPs gives some credence to the complaints that have been made by sub-postmasters about its behaviour towards them; if the Post Office can treat MPs like that, how will it deal with people who are frightened and bankrupt? Somehow in all of this saga, although it is hard to think that it would be possible, the Post Office has managed to tarnish its own reputation still further, while again tarnishing the reputation of sub-postmasters.

As right hon. and hon. Members know, I have handed on the mantle of this campaign to the hon. Member for North Durham (Mr Jones), and I am very pleased to see him in Westminster Hall today. That is partly because I will not be standing in the general election next year, but it is also because, frankly, I no longer trust the Post Office and I will not be negotiating with it further. I did not, as some newspaper reports suggested, withdraw the support of 150 MPs, because I have no right to do so. I withdrew my own personal support and what right hon. Members and hon. Members do now is, of course, up to them.

However, there are other avenues that need to be taken. We need a review by the Government, because we own this organisation. That review must be entirely independent of the Post Office, which has shown it cannot be trusted on the issue. Possibly there should be a special ombudsman.

In my letter to the chief executive of the Post Office, I asked for three things. I asked for no further destruction of documents, and by documentation I mean not only the documentation for those people who are within the mediation scheme but the documentation for those people who have not managed, for one reason or another, to get into the scheme. They have been mentioned already.

I hope the Government can prevent the Post Office from pleading the statute of limitations, because sub-postmasters’ legal actions—some of them caused by the behaviour of the Post Office—should not be barred by the passage of time. I hope that the Post Office and the Government can agree that hon. and right hon. Members should be briefed by Second Sight, not on individual cases, but on the way the mediation scheme has gone.

I wrote a letter to the Post Office at the beginning of last week asking for these things, but I have had no response.

[Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD)]

My right hon. Friend has already mentioned that evidence needed to investigate complaints by the applicants should not be destroyed. Might he, in his position as leader of this debate, make sure that the Minister asks that the Post Office guarantees that the material gathered and produced by Second Sight remains in Second Sight’s possession and that control of it cannot be given up and that it cannot be destroyed if or when the Post Office instructs Second Sight to do just that?

Ofsted

Tessa Munt Excerpts

Wednesday 10th December 2014 Westminster Hall

[Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD)]

I wish to make a short contribution, and the title of the debate enables me to do precisely that. I want to raise a matter on behalf of a constituent.

The debate relates to the accountability of Ofsted, and we all hope that Ofsted inspectors do their work in a fair, constructive and objective way. However, occasionally, judgments can go awry, and they sometimes have a serious impact.

A constituent submitted concerns to Ofsted about her son’s school and his treatment in that school. She was assured by an Ofsted inspector in writing that Ofsted had not revealed to the school that she had made a complaint. However, she has had sight of official documents showing that Ofsted did make the school aware that she had been in touch with inspectors.

I would like to ask the Minister specifically how my constituent and I can challenge Ofsted about its behaviour, which is unacceptable, a complete breach of trust and contrary to the whole notion of whistleblowing.

Oral Answers to Questions

Tessa Munt Excerpts

Monday 1st December 2014 Commons Chamber

[Mr Timpson]

I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s insight, analysis and recommendations as to what more we can do to ensure that children who need their voice to be heard have the requisite support from people who can provide them with the guidance and trust that are often lacking among other professionals. I am happy to talk to him about his suggestion. We have had some extremely exciting bids in this area through the innovation fund programme, which I will be able to say more about in the coming weeks. As I say, I shall be more than happy to discuss the subject with him in due course.

[Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD)]

Somerset county council has withdrawn regular checks on children educated at home, stating that it will contact families only if it is

“advised that Elective Home Education is not happening or is unsuitable.”

Does the Minister recognise that it is necessary to check systematically so that children at risk are identified, along with parents and carers who need support to deliver education, because otherwise school is often the only place where children at risk can have contact with other adults?

[Mr Timpson]

The hon. Lady refers to the recent Ofsted inspection in Somerset and the need for Somerset’s children’s services to make marked improvements in its response to ensure that children are safe. The example she has given is an element of that on which it needs to improve. I will not comment on the specific work that needs to be done, which has been well documented. She knows, as do her colleagues across Somerset, that I am determined to do whatever it takes to ensure the children in Somerset get the support and care they need so that they have a safe and fulfilling upbringing.

Oral Answers to Questions

Tessa Munt Excerpts

Thursday 16th October 2014 Commons Chamber

[Mr Vaizey]

I am sure that pizzas were not being delivered last night to the Labour women’s dinner, which I gather took place at the Imperial War museum. No doubt the hon. Lady will want to join me in congratulating the museum, which is so ably led by Di Lees, on its magnificent refurbishment, which has introduced the world war one galleries.

I am pleased to confirm that we are bang on target for our roll-out of superfast broadband. We expect to deliver it to 90% of premises by early 2016, but I expect that, given the pace of the programme, we shall exceed that target. The mobile infrastructure project is a pioneering project which has already brought many benefits to rural areas, and I am pleased to see that the super-connected voucher scheme is well under way.

[Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD)]

I spoke to the Minister again in July about broadband in my area, and showed him the map of the proposed coverage. It seems that exchanges just a couple of miles away from main roads such as the A38 and the A370, where fibre-optic cables were laid years ago, cannot be connected, and—to use BT Openreach’s description—the “poor-quality cables” around new cabinets that have been fitted in places such as Wells mean that previously generally reliable but slow services running at 750 kilobits have become desperately unreliable and pathetically slow, at about 250 kilobits. There is no point in changing the provider, because all the signals are carried over the same wires. What do my constituents have to do to get superfast broadband?

[Mr Vaizey]

We are delivering superfast broadband to Devon and Somerset, and under our programme, which is worth some £50 million, it will reach 90% of premises. However, as my hon. Friend says, this is a very complex engineering project which involves very complex work. I am particularly happy to praise the work that BT has done in many areas where it is already well ahead of schedule.

Oral Answers to Questions

Tessa Munt Excerpts

Monday 21st July 2014 Commons Chamber

[Mr Laws]

Schools and local authorities are delivering on this policy. We have allocated an additional £150 million for 2015-16. In addition, local authorities have a budget for improving maintenance of £1.2 billion to call on, if they wish to do so.

[Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD)]

Minutes of a meeting of governors at the Duke of York’s Royal Military school held on 26 November last year note that the Ministry of Defence, the school’s sponsor “were not keen” to be involved with military academies due to “reputational risk”. Will the Secretary of State elaborate on what that reputational risk comprises, say whether it applies to all military schools sponsored by the Ministry of Defence and enlighten the House about what discussions have taken place between her Department and the Ministry of Defence?

[Mr Laws]

We support the contacts between the military school and state school systems. I am happy to look at the points that my hon. Friend has raised and to write to her about them.

Oral Answers to Questions

Tessa Munt Excerpts

Monday 10th February 2014 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the hon. Member for Sheffield, Heeley (Meg Munn). [Interruption.] She has had one go; that is enough. May I say, however, that I echo entirely what the Minister has said? This House is losing far too many outstanding Members, and far too many outstanding female Members.

[Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD)]

There is a conflict of interest when abuse is alleged in independent and military fee-paying schools, in that the interests of children as possible victims are pitched against those of the schools, which want to protect their reputation in order to maintain fee income. Will the Minister look again at introducing mandatory reporting by staff who become aware of abuse allegations to a designated local authority officer, rather than simply requiring the reporting of abuse to a senior teacher or manager in the school?

[Mr Timpson]

The Working Together guidance, which was revised in 2013, makes abundantly clear the responsibility of all professionals who work with children to keep them safe. The evidence, internationally and from experts such as Eileen Munro, makes it clear that mandatory reporting does not necessarily make children safer and that it can have unintended consequences. We continue to look at the arguments, but at the moment the Government are not convinced that mandatory reporting is the way forward.

--- Later in debate ---

[Charlie Elphicke]

I, too, have a long history with the Bill, having served in Committee, and being here for its final Commons stage today. It has been a real privilege to watch a master class from my hon. Friend the Minister in how to pilot a Bill with great dignity, courtesy and endless quantities of patience.

I also wish to pay tribute to the shadow Minister, who is no longer in her place but performed her role in Committee with great aplomb. She has handed over to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Steve McCabe), whom I pressed earlier on the subject of childminders. It has been a pleasure to serve on this landmark Bill, and it will also be a pleasure to see it brought into force.

I shall concentrate on one basic statistic. In 1986, the employment rate for mothers whose youngest child is under three was 25%. Today, it is 56% and rising. That matters because it says everything about how the world has changed. If so many more women are in work—more than half of all mothers with children under three—child care is instantly an issue. That is why I raised the issue of childminders. In my constituency, if a family is above the benefits threshold but cannot afford £10,000 or so a year for a nursery, it has a real problem. That is why childminders are so important for that intermediate child care and why I make the case for the need to consider people in that salary band. There is a lot of deprivation in my constituency, and many people in low-skilled, low-paid work are in that position.

It also means that, because both partners are in work, parental love, affection and child care have to be juggled. Involvement in the child’s life has been transformed in the past 25 years: fathers are more involved with their children. Both parents are more involved with their children than ever before because of social change. That is why I welcome the changes in the Bill that relate to parental leave. Shared parental leave is a recognition of how the world has changed so very much.

I have raised the issue of contact many times in this place: the rights of children to have access to their parents. I thank the shadow Minister for using that formulation, because it is very important. It is a damning statistic that, of the 3 million children who live apart from a parent, 1 million have no contact with a parent three years after separation. That is really tragic, particularly given the way the world has changed. One parent, who was heavily involved in a child’s upbringing, is suddenly no longer there at all. That is destabilising to the child. That is why, in times past, I brought in a Bill to this House to enforce contact properly and place a duty on all. The right is not the right of the parent, but the right of the child to know and have a relationship with both their parents: the right of the child to have access to their parents.

This massive social change over the past 25 years matters so much because not all our judiciary are young people living the lives of modern parents seeking to get by. Not all academics or our social work establishment are young and as aware as they could be in their daily lives of this particular situation. It is for that reason that I want to congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes) on her passionate, heartfelt and deeply thoughtful speech. She is absolutely right in all she says. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for East Worthing and Shoreham (Tim Loughton) on taking up this case originally and putting it forward.

The statistic on the involvement of both parents in the life of their child is particularly relevant to clause 11, which states

“unless the contrary is shown, that involvement of that parent in the life of the child concerned will further the child’s welfare.”

I, too, share the concerns raised today that the amendment originally tabled by Baroness Butler-Sloss in the Lords Grand Committee risks watering that down. I recognise my hon. Friend the Minister’s assurances when he says that he is confident that the amendment does not alter the meaning of the clause or its intended effect. I hope that that will be reflected in the guidance issued to the family division, and that the family division will take note of that. It is really important that this principle is not ceded, particularly given that Baroness Butler-Sloss included not just the irrelevant issue of the division of a child’s time that resulted from the Norgrove report getting distracted by the Australian experience and the issue of the direct and indirect access.

It would not be right to have a situation in which the only contact for a parent who has been heavily involved in a child’s life is a phone call at Christmas, a book of photographs or the odd letter exchange. That does not constitute a right to know and a relationship with both parents. The right of children to have access to both their parents is essential. It matters because they may wish to turn one parent or to the other parent for mentorship, guidance, love and affection. We should enable that to happen. We should recognise that the world has changed.

[Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD)]

Of course, children will have access to their further family through both parents, so it is critical that they have an absolute right to direct, physical contact, and that should be a presumption, unless there is a proven safety reason.

--- Later in debate ---

[Tessa Munt]

Will the Minister give way?

[Mr Timpson]

Very briefly.

[Tessa Munt]

Will the Minister clarify absolutely that the presumption is that children should always have a right to have access to both parents, unless it is proven that it is not safe for them to be with one parent or the other?

[Mr Timpson]

As I made clear earlier in the debate, the paramountcy principle still holds in this case, as does the need to ensure that the child in question would be safe. That has to be the case, but what kicks in under those circumstances is the presumption that the child will have a relationship with both parents. That is an important change that we should all support.

Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to share some well deserved thanks.