Kate Osborne
MP for Jarrow and Gateshead East · Labour · United Kingdom
“Like many other MPs, I am still being contacted by constituents about their civil service pensions and the unacceptable delays. It is deeply concerning that my constituent Julie, who retired from the civil service in February, had her pension finalised only in September, and these delays are causing huge distress and financial hardship.”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for his detailed response; it will mean a lot to the descendants of the marchers and members of our community who may be watching this debate. I also thank the hon.”
House of Commons22 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We see similar challenges playing out now. These commemorative events and today’s debate are about remembering those who bravely marched to demand better, but they are also about looking to the future and embracing the potential of the north-east, because the challenges that faced working-class communities then continue to face them.”
House of Commons22 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Local weekly earnings remain below the national average. Almost a century on from the march, generations are still growing up in and around Jarrow unable to find suitable work and with high levels of inequality and poverty.”
House of Commons22 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Our history must be remembered and celebrated for the benefit of a new generation, but it must also be used to move forward, to learn from and to build a better world, because while some progress has been made, there is still a lot to do.”
House of Commons22 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Those are the same fundamental challenges that the Jarrow crusaders marched to confront 90 years ago, and they are why we cannot afford to be complacent about the progress we have made.”
House of Commons22 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
665 held · 605 searchable for Kate Osborne. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 10.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“Funding is needed now—we cannot wait—so does the Minister agree that the Government should include provision for a smoke-free 2030 fund in the health and social care Bill and bring this measure into force in 2022? Funding and investment in communities with the greatest need are important to help more smokers to quit, but we also need to prevent young people from starting. Reducing the availability of tobacco to young people can help to achieve that, and existing laws on age of sale need to be fully enforced. Although retailers need a licence to sell alcohol, no licence is required for the sale of tobacco products. Therefore enforcement action can be slower and more complex and, ultimately, have less impact on retailers that break the law than would be the case if a licensing scheme were in place.”
House of Commons10 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It calls for additional regulation and targeted investment, with the full engagement of health and care services and a shared mission to end smoking. The communities where smoking is still part of the daily fabric of life need investment to ensure that the support is there, particularly for those with high levels of addiction. Services need to be much closer to the people who need them—in social housing, mental health services, children’s centres and LGBT service settings. Wherever the need is greatest, we should make the support available. I agree with the APPG that it is not the taxpayer but highly profitable tobacco companies that should foot the bill for these important services.”
House of Commons10 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Although I have returned to it once or twice, I am pleased to say that I have now not smoked for more than a decade. The tobacco industry’s excessive profits are built on establishing an addiction in people like me in their teens, who unfortunately will often not succeed in stopping before it kills them. My hon. Friend the Member for Blaydon (Liz Twist) spoke about the figures in Gateshead, which is one of my local authorities. Smoking is estimated to cost my other local authority, South Tyneside, about £37.9 million every year. That is through smoking-related health and care needs, lost productivity and premature deaths. I support the recommendations made by the all-party parliamentary group on smoking and health for a comprehensive strategy.”
House of Commons10 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Miller. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for City of Durham (Mary Kelly Foy) and the APPG for securing this important debate. I must first announce my interest in the debate as a former smoker. I grew up in the ’80s, and most of my peer group smoked. I can recall purchasing cigarettes at the local sweet shop, which was happy to accommodate the limited budget of schoolchildren by allowing us to buy our cigarettes individually. I came from a household in which there were adult smokers, and for me to take up the habit seemed almost inevitable. I have fought a lifelong struggle against smoking to kick the habit, but it was not until I was pregnant with my first son that I felt able to give up.”
House of Commons10 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is time that the Prime Minister stepped up and sent a message about what really matters, because this Government cannot afford not to make an investment in our children’s future.”
House of Commons9 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It must come now for it to have any effect on learning and social outcomes. A Labour Government would see action and investment to ensure quality mental health support in every school, small group tutoring for all who need it, not just 1%, continued development for teachers, extracurricular activities for all, an education recovery premium and a guarantee that no child will go hungry. Only through Government delivering those things can we begin to see a reverse of the shocking child poverty figures across our regions. There is no economic reason why this Conservative Government could not deliver for our children and young people. They have been warned that failing to help children to recover lost learning could cost the economy and taxpayer as much as £420 billion—almost 30 times the cost of Labour’s comprehensive £15 billion plan.”
House of Commons9 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In my constituency, the child poverty rate stood at 24% in 2015. That is a shameful figure, but the latest data shows that in 2019-20, it stood at 36%—a 12 point increase. The Collins report calls for an investment of £15 billion—£700 per pupil—over three years to support children’s recovery. That would have gone a long way to reversing those figures, yet the Government have decided to go with only a tenth of what is needed. The stated figure of around £50 per child is an insult to hard-working families, schools and teaching staff in Jarrow and beyond. It is time that this Conservative Government began to wake up and realise that investment in our children is both the morally and fiscally responsible thing to do. Children and young people in my constituency cannot wait until the spending review for emergency funding to arrive.”
House of Commons9 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is clear from Kevan Collins’s resignation that the Government’s catch-up plan is failing to deliver for our children. It has highlighted that supporting children and young people to recover from the pandemic is not a priority for this Conservative Government. Let us make no mistake: child poverty was rising long before the beginning of the covid crisis. In the three years before the onset of the pandemic, my region of the north-east had the second highest child poverty rate in the UK at 37%. The north-east has urgently needed a new and credible Government strategy to end child poverty for some time. For too long, school budgets have been under extreme pressure, waiting lists for mental health services have been too long, and services to support families and children have been stretched by a lack of Government funding.”
House of Commons9 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Giving women and girls who are victims of gender-based violence more rights would go a long way to preventing them from dropping out before trial, as would fast-tracking rape and serious sexual assault cases through the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the courts. Seven in 10 women say that the Government’s efforts to make the UK safer for women are not working. This Conservative Government must put ending violence against women and girls at the top of their agenda. I urge colleagues across the House to vote for the motion today because, in the words of my right hon. Friend the Member for Tottenham (Mr Lammy), we need to step up, end this inaction and stop failing women and girls.”
House of Commons9 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“According to the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, just under 25% of sexual assaults are reported to the police—significantly less than other violent crimes. There are many reasons for that, but one often cited is distrust and fear of the police. We need an institutional overhaul. We must do our utmost to ensure that victims and survivors get access to the support that they need. It is essential that the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill be amended to ensure that the criminal justice system works for survivors of gender-based violence. For the last five years, the Government have promised a victims Bill in the Queen’s Speech, but like the rape review, it is still nowhere to be seen.”
House of Commons9 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Crown court backlog currently exceeds 58,000 cases, which means that survivors of serious sexual assault and rape are having to wait years to go to trial. This long wait for justice meant that a record number of criminal cases collapsed last year, as more than 1 million victims dropped out before trials even began. It is not just an issue in the courts. In England and Wales last year, more than 52,000 rapes were recorded by police, and only 843 resulted in a charge or a summons—a rate of 1.6%. That has led many survivors of rape and sexual assault to believe that the system is set up to work against them, not for them. The fact is that the police never investigate most sexual violence, because most sexual violence goes unreported.”
House of Commons9 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As has been highlighted today, violence against women and girls is endemic. It affects one in three of us in our lifetimes. From prevention to bringing perpetrators to justice, we need to be determined to do everything in our power to ensure that we tackle the underlying misogynistic attitudes that lead to violence against women and girls. We must ensure that victims feel able to report abuse and that they can trust the criminal justice system to enable them to gain justice. Earlier this year, the Government laid out their law and order agenda in the mammoth Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, but despite the Bill’s size, there is nothing in it at all that even attempts to tackle violence against women and girls.”
House of Commons9 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister says that these cases are extremely rare, but an immigration removal centre for women is set to open in the north-east on the former Medomsley detention centre site, despite, as he said, the Home Office previously committing to reducing its use of detention for women. Research shows that many detainees are survivors of torture, rape or trafficking, and detaining women in this way severely impacts on their mental health. Does he agree that reopening the Medomsley site should be reviewed and that immigration cases can be resolved more humanely and at less cost in the community?”
House of Commons7 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I believe that ARIA must have a clear mission to offer a societal return on taxpayer investment. The Bill is an opportunity for the Government to establish a mission-led funding agency that can benefit everyone in every part of the country. ARIA must not be used to pursue vanity projects that offer no return for the public.”
House of Commons7 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The UK has a long and proud tradition of science and innovation, and nowhere has this been seen more clearly than in the success of the NHS vaccine roll-out. It is because of our existing science and technology infrastructure that vaccines have been both successfully produced and rolled out in the UK and, indeed, further afield. It is British vaccines developed across the regions, including my own region, the north-east, that are allowing us to return to some form of normality. They show us all the incredible benefits that cutting-edge science and technology can provide. Any further investment in long-term, high-ambition research and development is of course welcome, but the proposals for ARIA in the Bill do not provide it with a clear purpose or mission.”
House of Commons7 June 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“How will the Secretary of State ensure that the voices of survivors of so-called conversion therapy and the people who support them will be heard in the consultation on a Bill to outlaw all conversion therapies, which have no place in all settings and all LGBT+ statuses, regardless of whether someone is consenting or coerced?”
House of Commons26 May 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In the Jarrow constituency there are many talented and dedicated people who leave the armed forces every year and find it difficult to transition into civilian life and employment. Despite employment not being covered by the Government’s Armed Forces Bill, will the Minister outline what steps he is taking to work specifically with local charities and local authorities to ensure that the talent and the skills of our ex-service personnel are utilised in civilian life?”
House of Commons24 May 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I join Unite the union in demanding that workers at Amazon have the right to join a trade union without fear of reprisal. Nothing angers the British public more than multinationals such as Amazon and Google and others paying ultra-low levels of tax. If the Government were serious about their levelling-up agenda, I am sure they would be happy to support new clause 22, which would prevent subsidiary companies registered in tax havens from benefiting from UK tax relief, and new clause 31, which would prevent multinational corporations with a history of corporate tax avoidance from benefiting from the super deductions in the Bill.”
House of Commons24 May 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Multinationals paying their tax does not just result in more spending on our public services; it also means that British firms that pay tax here will not be undercut by companies such as Amazon, which can shift profits overseas to take advantage of very low rates of corporation tax elsewhere. The online shopping boom that sprang from the covid lockdowns has led to Amazon creating more than 1,300 jobs in Gateshead. While job creation in my constituency is welcome, shocking employment practices have been reported at Amazon fulfilment centres in the UK and across the globe. Do the Government really believe that all large corporations should be entitled to tax breaks, regardless of how well or how badly they treat their employees?”
House of Commons24 May 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“All it does is change when businesses will decide to invest, rather than encouraging them to invest more. The super deduction is not targeted at British businesses that have been struggling. It is targeted at multinationals such as Amazon and Google, which will be able to use it to write off their entire remaining UK tax bill. The Treasury will lose tens of billions through this tax cut, which makes even more confusing its argument that it has not been possible to find the smaller sums required to give our NHS workers a well-deserved pay rise. It is essential that the income from wealth is taxed at the same level as income from work, and that multinationals such as Amazon are forced to redistribute their huge profits into our communities by paying their fair share of tax.”
House of Commons24 May 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In March, the Government had the opportunity to set out a plan to build a fairer, healthier, greener Britain. Instead, the Chancellor has chosen to continue down the path of further inequality and insecurity by writing off the tax liabilities of huge multinationals such as Amazon and Google. These big tech firms have made huge profits during the pandemic, and now the Government are enabling them to hide their money from the very people who have sustained them. The Chancellor’s super deduction incentive is not the innovative idea that he might like to portray it as. The Government’s plan to rapidly increase corporation tax after many years of cutting it means that the super deduction is an incentive to prevent businesses from pushing investment to the end of the period. It will make no difference to investment in the long run.”
House of Commons24 May 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am afraid this Queen’s Speech has shown that all workers can expect from this Government are empty words. Can the Government seriously talk about levelling up across the country when they are doing nothing about the fact that pay and terms and conditions are being levelled down across the sectors and the economy because of their failure to protect and enhance employment rights? If the Government really cared about working people, they would have used this Queen’s Speech to protect workers, to strengthen their rights and to end fire and rehire once and for all.”
House of Commons12 May 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On 13 January, the Prime Minister said: “We regard fire and rehire as unacceptable, and we will continue to make that point and seek further means of redress.” —[ Official Report , 13 January 2021; Vol. 687, c. 294.] On 23 March, the Under-Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Scully), said: “We will not kick this into the long grass. We will tackle it. We will not allow bully boy tactics.” —[ Official Report , 23 March 2021; Vol. 691, c. 790.] Just today, the Chancellor said that fire and rehire should not be used as a negotiating tactic. He went on to say that the Government await the findings of the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service report—but the Government have had the report since February.”
House of Commons12 May 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This has shown that the Government are not prepared to do anything about the way in which weak employment rights have caused unsafe workplaces and economic insecurity, all of which have been an issue for many years but have been exacerbated by the impact of the pandemic. This Government’s inaction—they have not done anything—on rogue employers using fire and rehire practices is, once again, a clear example of how they are not the party of working people. Fire and rehire is a disgraceful practice whereby employers, who have often made millions, or even billions, during the past 12 months or so, are now using the pandemic as a cover to reduce pay, strip back pensions and steal holiday entitlement from their hard-working staff. We have had plenty of lip service from the Prime Minister and his Ministers on fire and rehire.”
House of Commons12 May 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This is a Queen’s Speech that fails working people and seeks to further curtail people’s rights and freedoms. In 2019, the Government promised to bring forward an employment Bill, which, they said, would make the UK the best place in the world to work and include measures to strengthen workers’ rights and protections. Many of these measures were also promised back in 2018, on the back of the Taylor review. Yesterday, the Government put out a statement saying that they have taken all steps to protect workers, so why has this Queen’s Speech failed to deliver an employment Bill that would repeal the current anti-trade union legislation and make it illegal once and for all for employers to fire their staff and rehire them on much worse pay, terms and conditions?”
House of Commons12 May 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I hope the Minister will tell us when the Government will back up their words with action and act to outlaw this immoral practice. If this Government are serious about levelling up and raising standards, they must commit to ending fire and rehire once and for all. I hope to see that in next month’s Queen’s Speech, either in the Employment Bill or in stand-alone emergency legislation.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They must understand that well-paid, secure work is good for the economy, and greater security for workers would mean a stronger and quicker recovery. Our friends across Europe understand this. The practice of fire and rehire is already banned in Ireland, Spain and France, and is seen as unacceptable in other competitor economies, where Governments step in to defend their workers. Last week, the Government moved quickly to stop the European super league in its tracks. It showed that they can make things happen when they want to—and feel that they will get a popularity bounce off the back of it. The Government have made all the right noises about fire and rehire, but so far have done absolutely nothing about it.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Derby North (Amanda Solloway), during Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy questions if she could confirm when we would get a chance to see the ACAS report. The Minister told me that the Government find the practice of fire and hire “unacceptable”, but could not give me a date or time when the ACAS report would be released. Here we are, one month later, and the Government are still dragging their feet on this. I hope the Minister will tell us today when the Government intend to make the ACAS report available, because they certainly appear to want to bury it. We have heard a lot from this Government about levelling up and how Brexit will give us the opportunity to have higher standards across the board. Now is the Government’s chance to prove that they are serious about that.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In Oxfordshire, Jacobs Douwe Egberts will stop workers from taking summer holidays to thwart an overtime ban, starting on 1 May, in an ongoing fire and rehire dispute. My own union Unite is representing its members in all these disputes, but the problem goes much deeper and will only grow if the job retention scheme comes to an end. Last year, the Government asked the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service to produce a report on the full extent of fire and rehire, which was received by Ministers on 17 February. Despite numerous pledges to release the report and respond to it, the Government are still dragging their feet, leading us to wonder what ACAS has written that the Government do not want us to read. On 23 March, I asked the Under-Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, the hon.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In Manchester, Go North West drivers have been on an all-out strike for over 50 days against cruel fire and rehire abuses by bosses. The company wants to fire and rehire its drivers and force them to work longer for no additional pay, while also cutting sick pay for drivers with more than five years’ service. In Loughborough, global field service engineers employed by Brush Electrical Machines, owned by Melrose, are being balloted for strike action in response to fire and rehire pay cuts of up to £15,000. The proposed contracts include reductions to overtime rates, allowances and holidays. The engineers have been threatened with redundancy if they do not sign the new contracts, which will leave them on pay rates well below industry standards.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What has happened to loyal workers like Matthew at British Gas is an absolute scandal. It shows utter contempt for the loyalty many have shown for much of their working lives. British Gas, Centrica and their chief executive officer Chris O’Shea should be ashamed of this reckless corporate bullying. It is sad to see what has happened to British Gas, once a nationally respected institution but now a poster boy for the virus of poor employment practice that is spreading like another contagious deadly disease across the UK. In London, staff at Goodlord were given a choice to take a pay cut or become unemployed. Goodlord asked staff to take a contract with a lower rate of pay, which is below the London living wage.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Despite making more profit than in the previous year, British Gas has used the pandemic as a cover to impose a “take it or leave it” 15% pay cut and other changes that have affected the time their workforce spend with their families, by making the working week three hours longer. That is a whole month of additional labour added to the year. Last year British Gas issued Matthew with a fire and rehire ultimatum, giving him and his colleagues a deadline of 23 December. They were told that if they did not agree with the terms offered, worse terms would be forced upon them. This deadline was pushed back until 25 March. Matthew refused to be bullied by British Gas and was therefore given his notice on Monday 29 March. I send solidarity to Matthew and all other workers.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I take this opportunity to highlight the example of my constituent Matthew from Hebburn, who is one of many of my constituents who have been affected by fire and rehire. Matthew had worked for British Gas for 16 years. He was an exemplary worker, once proud to drive his blue van, who would have been happy to see out the rest of his working life with the company. He is now newly self-employed, having been one of the 300 to 400 staff who lost their jobs for refusing to sign up to new contracts, terms and conditions imposed by British Gas for nothing more than corporate greed.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a national emergency and disgrace that one in 10 workers are currently threatened with a practice that, in the words of the Prime Minister, is “unacceptable” and in the words of the Minister here today is “bully boy tactics.” I am not entirely convinced that the Prime Minister knows what fire and rehire is or what it is doing to thousands of workers across the UK. Fire and rehire is not a new phenomenon but it has gained prominence because of the conduct of many major employers, such as British Airways, Heathrow airport and British Gas, some in circumstances that they claim to be justified by the covid pandemic. The practice has highlighted how weak the current unfair dismissal laws are in this country and how they need to be strengthened.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The economic uncertainty stemming from the pandemic has provided another opportunity for big business to shift power even further away from workers so that they can boost long-term profits for shareholders. These are some of the same companies that have made use of public money through the Government’s job retention scheme. Fire and rehire must not be allowed to continue. Workers should not be forced to choose between losing pay or losing their jobs. Parliament must act urgently to outlaw this form of industrial blackmail. That is why I, along with my union Unite, am calling for fire and rehire to be included in next month’s Queen’s Speech, either in the Employment Bill or as stand-alone emergency legislation.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Many workers have lost friends, colleagues and family members to this terrible virus, and now at least one in 10 of them face a further pandemic of opportunistic employers using covid-19 as a cover to dramatically reduce workers’ pay and terms and conditions. Fire and rehire is a process that involves sacking workers and hiring them back on lower wages and worse terms and conditions—a practice that, according to research published earlier this year by the TUC, has had a disproportionate impact on black, Asian and ethnic minority workers, young workers and working-class people. However, fire and rehire is not new. In 2009, the Confederation of British Industry boasted of using the financial crash to establish a so-called flexiforce, in effect using economic uncertainty as a cover to replace permanent workers with flexible workers.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move, That this House has considered fire and rehire practices. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Murray. This debate has been oversubscribed, which I think says something about the strength of feeling and the level of anger at this appalling practice. I thank all hon. and right hon. Members for taking part today. One cannot help but notice the lack, or rather the complete absence, of Conservative MPs from today’s call list. I do hope this is not a reflection on how seriously the Government take this issue, but I suspect that is the case. Perhaps the Minister can prove me wrong. I would like to pay tribute to the workers of our country—the women and men who have battled so hard throughout the past 14 months to keep the country going in the face of covid-19.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“However, I say to the Minister and his Government that we need them to do the right thing and the decent thing, and bring forward legislation next month. Motion lapsed (Standing Order No. 10(6)).”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“He says that the Government are always on the side of working people, but I am afraid that is just more empty words, because that is not what I see. Where is the evidence that that is the case? The Government can no longer ignore the damage done by fire and rehire. If, as they say, they feel it is unacceptable and bully-boy tactics, then they need to show this through actions, not words. Two e-petitions have obtained over 14,000 signatures so far, one of which has over 10,000 and, as such, requires a written response from the Government, which I understand is something else that is still waiting to be received. Our trade unions and their members have done a fantastic job in protecting workers, and they continue to do so.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank everybody for their contributions today to what was a really good debate, with some very powerful speeches. Anger at the injustice of fire and rehire has shone through every contribution, without a single word of support for this awful practice. I wanted to touch on a few of the points that have been made, but unfortunately, time does not now allow that. I thank the Minister for his response, but I say to him that the Government need to act now to end fire and rehire. This shameful practice is taking advantage of a pandemic to strip workers of their hard-fought terms and conditions. He says that we need to tread carefully, but the problem is that people are being trampled over, and I do not accept that we need more debate on this issue, because there is no question of right or wrong here.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Earlier this year, I asked the Minister about the 555 sub-postmasters who took the Post Office to court and won the original litigation. Many of them, such as my constituent, Christopher Head, were left with nothing after court costs. How can the Minister possibly not agree with me and the current CEO of the Post Office that if proper justice is to be served for every single victim of this scandal, they must have their claim validated under the historical shortfall scheme, to prevent two tiers of justice? It seems to me that it is only this Minister and this Government who believe that that is okay.”
House of Commons27 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Giving evidence to the all-party parliamentary group for SEND, the Local Government Association said that local authorities will be unable to meet their statutory duties to support children with SEND without additional funding being made available. I urge the Minister to look deeper into how high-needs funding is undertaken. It is essential to the recovery from the pandemic that these long-standing issues over SEND funding are fixed. Finally, I ask the Minister when the SEND review will be published, and I ask her for a more detailed response than was given to me previously, and that was given in the report in the spring.”
House of Commons21 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I hope that the Minister here today will be able to give her thoughts on this issue, and on whether she agrees that SEND children who go to mainstream school should have the same amount of money ring-fenced as children who go to a special school. The Government have said that it costs more to teach children in special schools. I hope the Minister agrees that it should not matter what school a child goes to, and that a lack of funding for cash-strapped local authorities results in their not being able to give their schools and pupils the additional support that they so desperately need. This should not be a race to the bottom between mainstream and special schools. It is just a fact that local authorities continue to report the pressures on the high-needs funding block as one of the most serious financial challenges they face.”
House of Commons21 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is disappointing that the Government rejected the Select Committee’s recommendation that funding be increased to allow mainstream schools to receive £240 per pupil with SEND, ring-fenced for catch-up support in this academic year. Last week, in a Westminster Hall debate, I asked the Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work whether he could give me a further explanation as to why the Government rejected the report’s recommendation to commit to ring-fenced funding for pupils with SEND in mainstream schools. I did not get a clear answer from the Minister, other than an acknowledgment that the forthcoming SEND review remains a key priority for this Government.”
House of Commons21 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“However, in the light of experience earlier this year, it is unacceptable that the catch-up premium does not include ring-fenced funding for mainstream schools, which means that there is no guarantee that school leadership teams will direct that money to SEND children, given the already tight constraints on their budgets. Just a week ago, the Women and Equalities Committee published its “Unequal impact? Coronavirus, disability and access to services” report into the impact of coronavirus on disabled people, which widely acknowledged the problems created by a lack of ring-fenced funding for children with SEND in mainstream schools and showed evidence that such pupils consistently make less progress than other pupils with the same starting point.”
House of Commons21 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The long wait in obtaining a child and adolescent mental health services appointment, and the ability to access that appointment, particularly through the pandemic. The process to obtain an EHCP with little or no help or support during the process, and also the lack of support for those who do not qualify for a plan but who clearly need additional support. Schools that are struggling through lack of funding, and parents who are told, “Sorry; there is no money available to support your child further,” while all the time the child continues to struggle both at home and at school, quite often with a big impact on their mental and physical health. The Government recently announced funding premiums to help schools and students catch up, with additional weighting for mainstream schools that have pupils with SEND.”
House of Commons21 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship today, Sir Edward, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Slough (Mr Dhesi) for securing this important debate. It is a pleasure to speak here today. I have a particular interest in this debate, both as a member of the Women and Equalities Committee and as the mother of a SEND child. As colleagues rightly pointed out, the support system for SEND children was already at crisis point before the start of the pandemic, but like all other existing inequalities, the pandemic has shone a light on the failures within the system that deny young people their right to an education and has shown the urgent need for increased support for young people with SEND, their families and their educational providers. There are many issues.”
House of Commons21 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“However, there is concern that the White Paper falls short when addressing the disproportionate levels of online harm faced by women and those with protected characteristics. I hope that the Minister can agree that the online harms Bill must include gender-based abuse as a priority and recognise the compounding harm experienced by those with multiple protected characteristics rather than characterise them as separate issues. Abuse of any nature, online or offline, is unacceptable. It damages both democracy and equality.”
House of Commons20 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is clear that the increase in online abuse is posing a real threat to democracy and equal participation. Equal Power data shows that there has been a big increase in the number of women saying that they are unlikely to put themselves forward in an election in the space of the last 18 months. In December 2019, 59% of women surveyed said that they were unlikely to stand as an MP, with 44% saying that they were unlikely to stand as councillor. That figure has risen if there were an election within the year—just a year on from the start of the pandemic—to 74% unlikely to stand as an MP and 62% unlikely to stand as a councillor. I agree with the Centenary Action Group that the online harms Bill is an opportunity to tackle online abuse against women and girls, including elected representatives.”
House of Commons20 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As highlighted by Amnesty International, in the six weeks prior to the 2017 general election women MPs in Westminster from those backgrounds received 35% more abusive tweets than white women MPs. Those statistics become even more shocking when we consider that there are just 37 ethnic minority MPs in the House of Commons right now. That is just 5.7% of all MPs. Once again, the well documented disproportionate impact of the pandemic on BAME communities highlights why it is important that barriers preventing women of colour from standing for office are also broken down so that policy can be effectively influenced in this area by those with a diverse lived experience. I hope that the Minister can share the Government’s wider strategy on the increase in online abuse and extremism due to lockdown.”
House of Commons20 April 2021Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗