14/12/2016

:00:11. > :00:15.Statement, the Secretary of State education, secretary Justine

:00:16. > :00:21.Greening. With permission I would like to make

:00:22. > :00:23.a statement on the second stage of consultation on the government

:00:24. > :00:29.proposals to create a national funding formula for a schools,

:00:30. > :00:33.copies of which can be found on the government website. Since 2010, this

:00:34. > :00:38.comment has protected the core schools budget in real terms

:00:39. > :00:42.overall. But the system by which schools and high needs funding is

:00:43. > :00:50.distributed now needs to be reformed. To tackle the historic

:00:51. > :00:53.postcode lottery in school funding. These crucial reforms said at the

:00:54. > :00:58.heart of delivering the comment's placed to deliver a country which

:00:59. > :01:05.delivers for everyone. -- the government's pledge. The schools

:01:06. > :01:09.funding programme as it exists today is all pagan and outdated. The

:01:10. > :01:16.reality is that patchy and inconsistent decisions on funding

:01:17. > :01:20.Araf build up over many years on data that is sometimes decades or

:01:21. > :01:23.more out of date. Pot has been created over time is a funding

:01:24. > :01:30.system that allows similar schools with similar students to receive

:01:31. > :01:34.levels of funding so different that they put some young people at an

:01:35. > :01:40.educational disadvantage. For example, a school in Coventry can

:01:41. > :01:43.receive nearly ?500 more per pupil than a school in Plymouth. This is

:01:44. > :01:48.despite having the same proportion of pupils eligible for the pupil

:01:49. > :01:55.premium. A Nottingham School can attract ?460 more per pupil than one

:01:56. > :02:00.in Holton, despite having the same proportion of pupils eligible for

:02:01. > :02:03.the pupil premium. As these figures demonstrate, the funding system is

:02:04. > :02:08.broken and unfair and we cannot allow that to continue. Mr Speaker,

:02:09. > :02:11.our overall proposals for the principled and broad design of the

:02:12. > :02:16.schools and high needs funding system is set out in the first stage

:02:17. > :02:21.of the national funding formula consultation by my predecessor, the

:02:22. > :02:27.Right Honourable member for Loughborough, are widely welcomed.

:02:28. > :02:30.Today we set out our response to that and the next final stage of

:02:31. > :02:35.putting in place a final funding formula. Firstly, we are proposing a

:02:36. > :02:40.consistent base rate for every pupil at primary and secondary which

:02:41. > :02:47.steadily increases in value as they progress through the system. This is

:02:48. > :02:54.the largest factor in the formula accounting for 23 billion pounds of

:02:55. > :02:59.annual core schools funding and over 70% of the funding total. Secondly,

:03:00. > :03:03.we are proposing to protect resources per pupil to come from

:03:04. > :03:07.disadvantaged families and are taking a broad view to target ?3

:03:08. > :03:13.billion annually of funding for those most in need of support. Our

:03:14. > :03:17.formula will prioritise not only children in receipt of free school

:03:18. > :03:21.meals, but also those who living areas of disadvantage, helping to

:03:22. > :03:28.support many more families who are most likely to be just about

:03:29. > :03:31.managing to get by. And this is alongside our broader commitment to

:03:32. > :03:35.maintain the pupil premium funding for deprived pupils in full, which

:03:36. > :03:40.will be protected at current rate throughout the remainder of this

:03:41. > :03:44.Parliament. We have listened also to the responses received to the first

:03:45. > :03:49.stage of the consultation. Sauber funding formula will include a

:03:50. > :03:55.factor firm ability, reflecting the number of children who normally --

:03:56. > :03:59.often joined the school made here. This is responding to the

:04:00. > :04:03.consultation from London, which called particularly strongly for

:04:04. > :04:08.this. We will also protect those small rural schools which are so

:04:09. > :04:14.important to their local communities by inclusion of a sparsity factor.

:04:15. > :04:19.Thirdly, alongside a basic amount and an uplift for disadvantage, we

:04:20. > :04:24.will be directing ?2.4 billion per year in funding towards pupils with

:04:25. > :04:27.low prior attainment at both primary and secondary school. This will

:04:28. > :04:34.ensure they get the vital support that they need to be able to catch

:04:35. > :04:37.up with their peers. The proposed reforms will mean that schools and

:04:38. > :04:43.local authorities across England that have been underfunded for years

:04:44. > :04:47.will see their funding increase. Our proposed formula will result in more

:04:48. > :04:52.than 10,000 schools now gaining funding and more than 3000 of them

:04:53. > :04:57.receiving an increase of more than 5%. Of course, those that are due to

:04:58. > :05:06.see gains will see them more quickly. There will be increases of

:05:07. > :05:11.more than 3% in pupil funding and a further 2.5% in 1919-1920. At the

:05:12. > :05:15.same time restoring fairness to the funding system but also building

:05:16. > :05:21.significant protections into the formidable stop no school will face

:05:22. > :05:25.a reduction in more than 3% overall as a result of the new formula, and

:05:26. > :05:30.none will lose more than 1.5% per pupil per year. For high needs,

:05:31. > :05:34.which provides local authorities with the funding they need to

:05:35. > :05:39.deliver the extra support required by our most vulnerable children and

:05:40. > :05:43.young people, those with the most extreme special needs, whether they

:05:44. > :05:48.are in special schools or mainstream schools, we propose allocating more

:05:49. > :05:51.than ?5 billion in funding a year, and this will mean that no local

:05:52. > :05:55.authority will see their funding reduced as a result of the formula

:05:56. > :06:00.being introduced. We are also proposing to give local areas a

:06:01. > :06:05.limited flexibility to be able to redirect funding between their

:06:06. > :06:08.schools and high needs budget, through agreement between the local

:06:09. > :06:13.authority and the local schools to be able to support collaborative

:06:14. > :06:17.approaches to provision for special needs pupils. These protections will

:06:18. > :06:20.allow all schools and local authorities to manage the transition

:06:21. > :06:27.to fairer funding, while making the best use of their resources and

:06:28. > :06:31.managing -- ensuring every pound is used effectively to drive up

:06:32. > :06:35.standards and have the maximum impact for the young people we are

:06:36. > :06:39.investing in. In addition, to support schools to using their

:06:40. > :06:43.funding to the greatest effect, we are also putting in place and are

:06:44. > :06:48.continuing to develop a comprehensive efficiency package. As

:06:49. > :06:52.I said on the 21st of July, I recognise the importance of this

:06:53. > :06:56.reform. It is long overdue and I am also very keen to allow the proper

:06:57. > :07:02.amount of time for all schools and stakeholders to have a chance to

:07:03. > :07:08.reflect on what is a detailed for. The consultation will therefore be

:07:09. > :07:14.opened for 14 weeks until the 22nd of March, with final decisions to be

:07:15. > :07:18.made before the summer next year. It is our intention that once we reach

:07:19. > :07:25.a final design, the national funding formula will be properly introduced

:07:26. > :07:27.in 2018, 2019, and this will be a transitional year, during which

:07:28. > :07:34.local authorities will continue to be able to set local schools funding

:07:35. > :07:37.formula, before we then move in 2019-2020, to having our schools

:07:38. > :07:42.funding go directly to schools. So that the great majority of each

:07:43. > :07:46.schools' individual budget is determined on the basis of a

:07:47. > :07:54.national, single national for Miller. It is now -- no time for us

:07:55. > :08:00.to consult on the detailed make-up of that formula so we can get it

:08:01. > :08:04.right. We are keen to hear as many views as possible and I encourage

:08:05. > :08:08.members and their constituents to scrutinise and respond to the

:08:09. > :08:13.details consultation documents we are now issuing. The proposals will

:08:14. > :08:18.mean that all schools and local areas will now receive a consistent

:08:19. > :08:22.and a fairer share of the schools budget, so that they can have the

:08:23. > :08:27.best possible chance to give every child the opportunity to reach their

:08:28. > :08:32.full potential. Once implemented, the formula will mean that wherever

:08:33. > :08:37.a family lives in England, their children will attract a similar

:08:38. > :08:41.level of funding and one that properly reflects their needs. Mr

:08:42. > :08:45.Speaker, this government believes that the funding system we are

:08:46. > :08:52.proposing will ensure that the schools system works fairly. I

:08:53. > :08:55.commend the statement to the house. After so many delays the Secretary

:08:56. > :09:01.of State has finally come Ford with the fairer funding formula. I thank

:09:02. > :09:07.our forgiving site offer a statement. And the documents she

:09:08. > :09:13.sent me just half an hour ago. If only it lived up to its name as a

:09:14. > :09:17.fairer funding formula. Does she recall her commitment to continue to

:09:18. > :09:24.protect school funding in her party's manifesto? Does she accept

:09:25. > :09:27.that the National audit office have confirmed what we have been told,

:09:28. > :09:32.that the government will be cutting the schools budget by at least 8%?

:09:33. > :09:36.That is not changed at all by today's announcement. Does she

:09:37. > :09:39.remember that that same manifesto promised that under a Conservative

:09:40. > :09:44.government the amount of money following your child into school

:09:45. > :09:48.will be protected, yet the National Audit Office has made it clear that

:09:49. > :09:57.funding per pupil will also fall by 8%. Is the National Audit Office

:09:58. > :10:03.wrong or is the new unelected prime minister just ripping up the

:10:04. > :10:05.manifesto her predecessor put to the country? And the Secretary of State

:10:06. > :10:09.herself said that their so-called fairer funding formula would mean

:10:10. > :10:16.that no school would lose more than 1.5% of their funding per year. How

:10:17. > :10:25.could she possibly reconcile this with schools facing projected cuts

:10:26. > :10:29.of hope to 10%? Can the Secretary of State tell the house how exactly a

:10:30. > :10:32.funding formula can be fair when it means that a third of local

:10:33. > :10:39.authorities and around 10,000 schools serving more than 2 million

:10:40. > :10:43.children will be losing money? In a period where pupil numbers and

:10:44. > :10:47.inflation is rising in tandem, the pressure on school budgets will

:10:48. > :10:50.continue to increase. The National Audit Office have told us today that

:10:51. > :10:57.school budgets are facing a real terms reduction. Can the secretary

:10:58. > :11:01.of State tell the House what percentage of the schools budget

:11:02. > :11:06.will be cuts over the course of this Parliament, and how much that cut

:11:07. > :11:10.will be for the average secondary school? Will be Secretary of State

:11:11. > :11:14.tell the house at a time when the pressure on schools is increasing,

:11:15. > :11:18.how can she possibly justify that decision? Her own department has

:11:19. > :11:22.said that schools will need to make 3 billion in efficiency savings over

:11:23. > :11:25.the course of this Parliament, yet the National Audit Office has said

:11:26. > :11:29.the schools are not prepared for that scale and pace of change is,

:11:30. > :11:34.and that the department has failed to make this clear to them. So will

:11:35. > :11:38.the Secretary of State tell the House how exactly her department

:11:39. > :11:43.will ensure that schools can meet our demands? Is the suggestion that

:11:44. > :11:48.schools make 1.7 billion in savings by using staff more efficiently,

:11:49. > :11:52.just a euphemism for cutting the jobs of teachers, teaching assistant

:11:53. > :11:56.and vital support staff, just at the point that the workforce is already

:11:57. > :11:59.facing a crisis? Her department has said the funding formula will be

:12:00. > :12:07.about targeting on the basis of pupils' need rather than postcode.

:12:08. > :12:10.Can she explain why schools up and down the country will be losing out

:12:11. > :12:15.and that many in the most disadvantaged areas will be losing

:12:16. > :12:19.out the most? The only new money being offered is to expand the few

:12:20. > :12:25.remaining grammar schools. 80% of them in Tory held seats, regardless

:12:26. > :12:29.of where the need for places is. Does she accept that this means that

:12:30. > :12:35.only parts of Britain denied new funding are the comprehensive areas

:12:36. > :12:38.in England? Does she acknowledged that nearly 60% of secondary schools

:12:39. > :12:44.across the country already receive less funding than they spent on

:12:45. > :12:47.teaching and are already running at a deficit? Can she tell us

:12:48. > :12:52.projections for increasing pupil numbers over the spending review,

:12:53. > :12:55.and what her forecast is for the rate of inflation facing schools,

:12:56. > :13:02.and what therefore is the rising costs facing schools? The Secretary

:13:03. > :13:07.of State seems to believe that all of these savings and cuts can be

:13:08. > :13:11.managed without any impact on the education of our children. Can she

:13:12. > :13:15.tell the House how exactly she ensures this happens in practice?

:13:16. > :13:19.They used to say the Tories knew the value of nothing but the price of

:13:20. > :13:24.everything. Now they don't even know that. Failed on the economy. Failed

:13:25. > :13:34.on protecting the NHS. And now failed on our children.

:13:35. > :13:41.Mr Speaker, I have to say, I'm absolutely staggered at the response

:13:42. > :13:47.from the shadow Secretary of State for Education. There is cross-party

:13:48. > :13:53.support for reforming the national funding formula because I think we

:13:54. > :13:57.all know that it is impossible to justify the current approach. I

:13:58. > :14:01.think it would have been better if we had had a more thoughtful

:14:02. > :14:10.response rather than just a diatribe of political rhetoric from the

:14:11. > :14:15.dispatch box across. In relation to some of the points she was trying to

:14:16. > :14:20.make we have been trying to protect the schools budget in real terms.

:14:21. > :14:25.That is because we have a thriving economy that is generating the taxes

:14:26. > :14:34.that means we can continue to invest in our public services.

:14:35. > :14:39.She speaks about the funding then seems to have misunderstood or not

:14:40. > :14:42.listened to the statement I just made, Mr Speaker. Perhaps she had

:14:43. > :14:49.already written what she wanted to say then was not interested in the

:14:50. > :14:51.reality. This funding formula absolutely includes making sure we

:14:52. > :14:56.have the right amount of funding going towards children from more

:14:57. > :15:01.disadvantaged areas, and in fact we have taken a broader definition of

:15:02. > :15:06.disadvantaged to make sure it is not just children who are eligible for

:15:07. > :15:09.free school meals, who will be able to get additional support. We have

:15:10. > :15:14.also made sure this formula builds in a strong focus on low prior

:15:15. > :15:18.attainment, so the children who have fallen behind that we need to invest

:15:19. > :15:25.in and support to catch up and get that additional resource on, and

:15:26. > :15:29.schools with more of them get more. She seemed to fail to even hear the

:15:30. > :15:34.statement I made, and I have to say, Mr Speaker, I think based on the

:15:35. > :15:38.lack of engagement from the front bench I am going to sit down and

:15:39. > :15:45.give colleagues with more thoughtful questions at chance to contribute.

:15:46. > :15:49.Thank you, Mr Speaker. I certainly welcome this statement as many

:15:50. > :15:53.parents across the country were also welcome it. It is obviously long

:15:54. > :15:57.awaited, as she conceded, but it is the right tone and context and it is

:15:58. > :16:00.the right capacity, essentially, to make the changes. It will also of

:16:01. > :16:05.course enable schools to plan ahead and that will be very good for all

:16:06. > :16:08.schools in terms of teacher recruitment and teacher retention.

:16:09. > :16:20.That is something else we need to address. Can I ask the Secretary of

:16:21. > :16:22.State, will she be sure to accommodate the issues about the

:16:23. > :16:24.future of local government in this? There will be some changes. This is

:16:25. > :16:27.a national formula and therefore the future of national government has to

:16:28. > :16:29.be considered within that context. We are busy doing that already. But

:16:30. > :16:32.I felt it was quite important to make sure in the second stage of

:16:33. > :16:37.consultation that we recognised the need to understand how a little bit

:16:38. > :16:41.of local flexibility could help us make sure we got this formula

:16:42. > :16:44.working right on the ground, so that is why that is part of the

:16:45. > :16:50.consultation, as I set out. We have set out our plans for the 2018 -

:16:51. > :16:52.2019 transition year. We are asking about how to look at this more

:16:53. > :16:56.carefully in future years and that is precisely why I think it is

:16:57. > :16:59.important colleagues from around the house take the time now to engage

:17:00. > :17:06.with what is a lot of data we have published today, Mr Speaker. Thank

:17:07. > :17:11.you, Mr Speaker. Whilst we would all agree with the aims of a fairer

:17:12. > :17:17.funding formula, does the Secretary of State not recognise she is

:17:18. > :17:20.delivering this now in a context of dramatic and significant overall

:17:21. > :17:27.cuts to schools' budgets, and therefore even the so-called winners

:17:28. > :17:31.in her formula will also be facing school budget cuts? In a

:17:32. > :17:38.constituency like mine which is a loser under this formula, where I

:17:39. > :17:39.have over 50% of children living in poverty, the second-highest

:17:40. > :17:45.constituency in the entire country, losing money to their school budget,

:17:46. > :17:50.that will mean the one-to-one tuition going, the catch-up classes

:17:51. > :17:54.going, the extracurricular, the drama, the Shakespeare, all those

:17:55. > :18:00.vital things I want to see kids in Moss side and Mostyn doing, will be

:18:01. > :18:06.going as a result of her funding crisis, aside from this announcement

:18:07. > :18:13.today? I encourage you to actually look at the detail in relation to

:18:14. > :18:17.your own constituency and the documents will be published once we

:18:18. > :18:20.have got through this statement, as is the normal practice of this

:18:21. > :18:24.house. I would encourage her to look at that. What I would say is, yes,

:18:25. > :18:28.we do need to work with school to make sure they can deliver

:18:29. > :18:35.efficiencies but if one thing can be seen today, I'd funding formula

:18:36. > :18:38.across schools over the years, many schools are able to deliver

:18:39. > :18:46.excellent and outstanding results on a very different cost basis -- it is

:18:47. > :18:48.that a diverse funding formula across schools. We need to make sure

:18:49. > :18:51.this is being protected in terms of the core school funding in real

:18:52. > :18:56.terms over this parliament, need to make sure it was as far as it

:18:57. > :19:03.possibly can. I would also say to the honourable lady, in relation to

:19:04. > :19:10.this on schools, yes, the NAO report flags that up, but there are issues

:19:11. > :19:13.around introducing the living wage, for workers who are among the lowest

:19:14. > :19:16.paid in our country, some of them are in schools, who should benefit

:19:17. > :19:22.from that which being introduced, and the employer also, contribution

:19:23. > :19:25.to teacher pension schemes to make sure we can have sustainable

:19:26. > :19:28.pensions for teachers in the long run. I would hope the honourable

:19:29. > :19:34.members opposite would have welcomed those steps/ we can also work with

:19:35. > :19:46.schools to help them achieve efficiencies. I warmly welcome the

:19:47. > :19:53.statement -- steps. This is so keenly anticipated and looked

:19:54. > :19:59.forward to by underfunded local authority such as my own. We set out

:20:00. > :20:02.a very clear timetable today and in spite of the party opposite that

:20:03. > :20:08.clearly has no interest in having fairer funding and funding going to

:20:09. > :20:14.the most disadvantaged children, the ones who need to catch up, we will

:20:15. > :20:16.press on with this process. The Secretary of State is to be

:20:17. > :20:20.congratulated for grappling with this issue but as she has already

:20:21. > :20:26.indicated, the devil will be in the detail, and I look forward to

:20:27. > :20:28.looking at that. However, 16-19 -year-old education and 16 to

:20:29. > :20:34.19-year-olds in schools as well as colleges, there has been a cut over

:20:35. > :20:38.the last period of the coalition Government and there is a big

:20:39. > :20:42.difference in what they get compared with 14 to 16-year-olds at

:20:43. > :20:47.university as well -- and those that university as well. What will she do

:20:48. > :20:50.about that? We both share a deep interest and passion for technical

:20:51. > :20:55.education and improving that. As he will know we are looking very

:20:56. > :20:58.carefully, and my honourable friend, as well, to make sure we can have a

:20:59. > :21:03.skills strategy now implement that really does make sure our technical

:21:04. > :21:06.education system is at the same gold standard level we are steadily

:21:07. > :21:13.ensuring our education system is that. We have actually protected the

:21:14. > :21:18.per-pupil core funding for pupils post-16, but we want to look further

:21:19. > :21:20.at how we can make sure further education now improves its

:21:21. > :21:27.attainment levels in the same way we have seen happening across the

:21:28. > :21:31.broader school system. West Berkshire and walking education

:21:32. > :21:37.authorities which serve my constituency are some of the worst

:21:38. > :21:40.funded -- and walking. We welcome the statement, therefore. Can there

:21:41. > :21:47.be any transitional relief in 2017 because our financial need is now?

:21:48. > :21:51.My right honourable friend will know that the transitional relief we had

:21:52. > :21:55.in the previous year has been carried over to this forthcoming

:21:56. > :21:58.year and of course beyond that there are now setting up -- we are setting

:21:59. > :22:02.out the steps to make funding figure. It is important and in spite

:22:03. > :22:06.of the debate that no doubt will be kicked off Mike on the back of this

:22:07. > :22:12.consultation, I just do not think we can accept a situation where a

:22:13. > :22:18.similar child with similar needs will get such a different amount of

:22:19. > :22:22.funding put into their education -- kicked off on the back of this. This

:22:23. > :22:25.simply cannot be accepted and should not be accepted and that is what we

:22:26. > :22:30.are setting out today in the solution. Thank you, Mr Speaker. The

:22:31. > :22:36.Secretary of State will be aware that the transformation of London

:22:37. > :22:39.schools... In 1997 when Labour took power schools in my constituency

:22:40. > :22:44.were among the worst. By the time we left they had become among the best,

:22:45. > :22:49.and that has continued in the last Government as well. That is thanks

:22:50. > :22:52.to the London Challenge and continued investment. Can I ask the

:22:53. > :22:57.Secretary of State whether she can confirm that London achievement will

:22:58. > :23:02.not be damaged as part of this formula, and that the ?260 million

:23:03. > :23:06.we heard London schools would lose, that that is not going to happen,

:23:07. > :23:12.because we need to learn from London's success and replicate it in

:23:13. > :23:15.other parts of the country? Well, I think I can reassure her that London

:23:16. > :23:19.under this formula will continue to be well funded. In spite of the

:23:20. > :23:26.percentage of children on free school meals, eligible for that in

:23:27. > :23:32.London, following from 28% to 70% of the last ten years, London does

:23:33. > :23:37.remain one of the most deprived parts of our country in places -- Do

:23:38. > :23:42.I Drink Too Much? . The formula will ensure London still receives some of

:23:43. > :23:50.the best funding of any regions -- 28% to 17%. Other areas in other

:23:51. > :23:53.parts of the country have similar challenges in other areas.

:23:54. > :23:57.Additional prior attainment, not being funded, for no other reason

:23:58. > :24:01.than they are not London. It is no time to make sure we have a fair

:24:02. > :24:06.approach and that this is a fair approach for London as well. I

:24:07. > :24:12.wholeheartedly support this announcement. For too long Swindon's

:24:13. > :24:15.children have been short-changed by Labour's hopeless funding formula

:24:16. > :24:19.and the change cannot come soon enough. Can I also urge the

:24:20. > :24:23.Secretary of State to explore options on PFI schemes, frustrating

:24:24. > :24:28.improvements in lots of my local schools? This issue was raised in

:24:29. > :24:32.response to the original phase, so we are going to make sure that as

:24:33. > :24:36.part of that formula we reflect the fact there are PFI commitments that

:24:37. > :24:40.will continue in real terms. I have no doubt that will be good news to

:24:41. > :24:44.his local area. Obviously we do not want to perpetuate them when they

:24:45. > :24:48.have steadily run down. We do think it is important to reflect the

:24:49. > :24:55.reality of those cost pressures on schools in that particular position.

:24:56. > :24:58.The Secretary of State listed a number of factors, mobility,

:24:59. > :25:01.disadvantage, and prior attainment. Crucial factors in many

:25:02. > :25:04.constituencies, particularly in urban areas like the one I

:25:05. > :25:08.represent. Can she give more detail on how big a factor they will be?

:25:09. > :25:11.They will determine how far constituencies like my lose out and

:25:12. > :25:15.the concern in Liverpool will be that coming on top of substantial

:25:16. > :25:19.cuts to local government funding, our schools will lose out at a time

:25:20. > :25:28.when they are finding it challenging to recruit teachers and head. As he

:25:29. > :25:33.points out, in addition to the core base and mode of funding there is a

:25:34. > :25:37.further 25%, roughly, that is uplifted in relation to deprivation

:25:38. > :25:43.and additional needs, but also more vocational needs. We recognised that

:25:44. > :25:47.although mobility was not one of the original factors part of the first

:25:48. > :25:50.phase consultation. In other words, the challenge that some schools in

:25:51. > :25:55.local areas face when children arrive during the year, rather than

:25:56. > :25:57.growth, which of course is in relation to steady demographic

:25:58. > :26:03.change and sometimes in between years. We thought it was important

:26:04. > :26:06.to reflect that in the formula. So we have looked at the cost pressures

:26:07. > :26:13.we think their in relation to mobility, and we were originally

:26:14. > :26:16.going to base the formula of 2018 and 2019 on historic formers,

:26:17. > :26:19.because that is what we have evidence based at the moment but we

:26:20. > :26:24.need a sensible way to look at mobility going forward. Can I

:26:25. > :26:27.welcome this statement? Gloucestershire has been a properly

:26:28. > :26:34.funded local authority and this will be welcomed in my county. -- has

:26:35. > :26:39.been a poorly funded. Taking into account sparsity, something in rural

:26:40. > :26:43.constituencies like mean. -- like mine. Based on the timetable she has

:26:44. > :26:49.set out with the final position being reached in 2020, that we have

:26:50. > :26:53.will have delivered on our very clear manifesto commitment to have

:26:54. > :26:56.delivered their funding on this Parliament. I believe we will have

:26:57. > :26:59.done that. We will have brought in place a formula that works more

:27:00. > :27:03.effectively, we will have transitioned it inappropriately and

:27:04. > :27:06.I think that it will be a big step forward, particularly for schools

:27:07. > :27:11.that have been so underfunded for so long. Mr Speaker, the Secretary of

:27:12. > :27:18.State is right. This kind of funding has to be upgraded in time and I

:27:19. > :27:21.certainly welcome it. But is she also aware that it is the

:27:22. > :27:26.responsible day of this House to check the furnace, over time,

:27:27. > :27:32.through the committee system, and in this House. -- check the fairness.

:27:33. > :27:36.But would you also agree that overall the challenges in our

:27:37. > :27:39.education system are great, when a chief inspector about to retire can

:27:40. > :27:44.point out that so many bright children in our country, good

:27:45. > :27:49.through primary school to 11, we lose them to education post aged 11.

:27:50. > :27:51.Will she do something about that and do something about the fact that the

:27:52. > :27:55.Chief inspector is also deeply worried that many of the big towns

:27:56. > :28:00.and cities in the Midlands and the north that are severely

:28:01. > :28:04.underperforming their pupils? He does set out some of the challenges

:28:05. > :28:08.we continue to face in our education system and of course that is

:28:09. > :28:11.precisely why the National funding formula helps us make sure

:28:12. > :28:13.resourcing does go to those parts of the country and those schools in

:28:14. > :28:19.particular that are in more disadvantaged areas, and also have

:28:20. > :28:22.cohorts of young people and children perhaps starting from the furthest

:28:23. > :28:27.behind. That is not only the sensible approach, but it is the

:28:28. > :28:29.right thing to do for those children and those schools. For too long we

:28:30. > :28:36.have had an approach on school funding that does not build that in

:28:37. > :28:40.to the formula. That is what we are trying to resolve today. This is the

:28:41. > :28:45.second stage consultation. There will be 14 weeks now for everyone to

:28:46. > :28:48.look at whether they feel the way in which we blended together these

:28:49. > :28:52.different criteria is the right way. I think it is, but in addition to

:28:53. > :28:57.what we are announcing today of course he will be aware we have

:28:58. > :29:00.launched six already, six opportunity areas, looking at how we

:29:01. > :29:03.can make sure we have excellent education, especially in those parts

:29:04. > :29:09.of the country where we still have not seen enough improvement.

:29:10. > :29:16.Plymouth and Coventry were both heavily born -- bombed during the

:29:17. > :29:24.Second World War. Both have a similar demographic. Would she agree

:29:25. > :29:27.the discrepancy of premium pupil per year... Can I ask for maximum

:29:28. > :29:31.clarity at the earliest opportunity in terms of what schools will

:29:32. > :29:35.actually get in my constituency to help them prepare for the September

:29:36. > :29:43.2017 budget, which is likely to be challenging? We will be publishing

:29:44. > :29:52.after this statement to the House, Mr Speaker, a lot of detail in

:29:53. > :29:57.relation to individual schools. All members will be able to look at all

:29:58. > :30:00.of the schools in their constituencies to see notionally,

:30:01. > :30:08.illustrator Lee, how this formula would operate for them. --

:30:09. > :30:13.illustrative leave. We really did want to try and be very clear with

:30:14. > :30:17.the House in relation to how this funding formula will work on the

:30:18. > :30:22.ground, and I would encourage all members to look at the data for

:30:23. > :30:25.their own communities. I think what it shows is that no school is gone

:30:26. > :30:35.to get exactly the same under this new formula as perhaps it has in the

:30:36. > :30:41.past. But it will be is much fairer. The statement is by no means all

:30:42. > :30:46.bad. It is indisputable that school overheads are going up and more

:30:47. > :30:50.secondary schools will go into debt. Why are we continuing to squander

:30:51. > :30:56.money on pointless pet projects? Surely it is a huge though version

:30:57. > :31:00.now. I don't agree with what he has said. We have seen year-on-year

:31:01. > :31:07.improvements in the education system. As one of my predecessors

:31:08. > :31:11.said earlier this week, I do think it is important that we continue the

:31:12. > :31:18.reforms that we have got under way. That is precisely what we will be

:31:19. > :31:22.doing. Can I very much welcome the statement on behalf of schools in my

:31:23. > :31:26.constituency in Kent, who are significantly underfunded and

:31:27. > :31:31.disadvantaged by the current formal. I also welcome our commitment to a

:31:32. > :31:35.rapid introduction of a new formula. In the meantime, can I ask her to

:31:36. > :31:38.seriously consider whether there is any possibility of interim funding

:31:39. > :31:44.for schools onto the new formula is introduced? As I replied to an

:31:45. > :31:49.earlier honourable friend, the additional uplift that was provided

:31:50. > :31:54.last year will be continued to the following year, after which we will

:31:55. > :32:01.then move to the introduction of the funding formula starting in 2018. We

:32:02. > :32:05.are now coming forward with a fundamental solution to what has

:32:06. > :32:11.been a long-term problem, not just over the last decade, but has been

:32:12. > :32:17.building up arguably fur 30 years in the making, and it is neat -- no

:32:18. > :32:25.time to sort this out. Can the Secretary of State confirm whether

:32:26. > :32:30.an area adjustment multiplier will be applied? The funding gap between

:32:31. > :32:36.the national average and that of schools in the Northeast currently

:32:37. > :32:41.stands at ?45 million per year. Will we see that gap increasing or dink

:32:42. > :32:45.resit -- decreasing as a result of this formula? It doesn't include an

:32:46. > :32:49.area cost adjustment. It will be based on a hybrid measure which will

:32:50. > :32:52.look at not only general labour market costs but also those

:32:53. > :32:58.particularly in relation to teachers. This is the consultation

:32:59. > :33:01.feedback. It is also one of the reasons why extensive part of the

:33:02. > :33:09.country such as London will continue to be well funded even under this

:33:10. > :33:15.formula. I call Mr Julian Knight. I welcome the substance and tone of

:33:16. > :33:19.this statement. Schools in Solihull receive ?1300 a year less per pupil

:33:20. > :33:24.than nearby Birmingham. As a result we lose teachers to Birmingham. Can

:33:25. > :33:26.the Secretary of State assure me that at least some of this on

:33:27. > :33:33.fairness will be addressed this Parliament? I have set out the

:33:34. > :33:37.timelines for the rolling out of introducing this national funding

:33:38. > :33:41.formula. He sets out some of the by-products of having the current

:33:42. > :33:46.situation which is unfair, another reason why it is important we

:33:47. > :33:52.address it. It slightly pains me today to call an Everton supporter,

:33:53. > :33:56.but Mr Andy Burnham. Will keep the gloating to a minimum. She is

:33:57. > :34:00.dressing of up very well but isn't the reality of what is announced

:34:01. > :34:04.today that some of the schools in the most deprived parts of the

:34:05. > :34:09.country facing the biggest challenges will see money taken away

:34:10. > :34:12.from them, and that money given to other schools elsewhere? Wouldn't it

:34:13. > :34:19.be much fairer for her to go to the Chancellor and say, have some more

:34:20. > :34:24.money to bring the gap up that way? She is making teachers redundant to

:34:25. > :34:28.pay for this change. Again, there is a lot of rhetoric but in the end of

:34:29. > :34:32.the honourable member does not seem to have listened to the statement I

:34:33. > :34:37.made, which is very clear that this funding formula absolutely does

:34:38. > :34:42.reflect issues of deprivation and low prior attainment, and also

:34:43. > :34:46.issues in relation to local cost. I think it is a step forward in making

:34:47. > :34:50.sure we have a much fairer approach in the future than we have had in

:34:51. > :34:53.the past. I don't think he would be able to justify the current

:34:54. > :34:57.situation too many parents who simply don't understand why their

:34:58. > :35:03.children get less funding than other children purely because of where

:35:04. > :35:08.they are growing up. Can I tell my right honourable friend that I held

:35:09. > :35:13.a round table of the headteachers of my primary and secondary schools in

:35:14. > :35:18.North Dorset. One of the big issues they referenced was the recruitment

:35:19. > :35:24.of an retention of staff Imrul areas where the costs are higher, living

:35:25. > :35:29.costs are higher. -- in rural areas. This is a very welcome announcement.

:35:30. > :35:35.It will be warmly welcomed by those headteachers. On their behalf can I

:35:36. > :35:47.simply say thank you? I'm grateful for that. And as he points out, it

:35:48. > :35:52.is important that this for Miller is able to reflect the very different

:35:53. > :35:56.challenges that school space in different situations in our country.

:35:57. > :36:09.That is why the sparsity factor matters. The Secretary of State will

:36:10. > :36:13.be aware that all over the country schools are finding it difficult to

:36:14. > :36:17.recruit teachers because we are not training enough. But in Slough, for

:36:18. > :36:22.example, where we don't get as much resources, although we have the same

:36:23. > :36:27.kind of challenges as in London, the headteachers are desperate. House

:36:28. > :36:34.prices went up faster than anywhere else in the country in the past

:36:35. > :36:38.year. Can she assure me that schools in my constituency will actually not

:36:39. > :36:45.face a cut as a result of this formula, but will be rewarded for

:36:46. > :36:49.the brilliant work they do? I think she should welcome this formula

:36:50. > :36:54.because at the moment the way in which any amount of money that flows

:36:55. > :36:59.into our are schools takes place is done on and unfair basis. I think

:37:00. > :37:03.for a community like hers, the architecture that we are now

:37:04. > :37:08.proposing for this funding formula, will absolutely make sure that while

:37:09. > :37:14.principally it is a fair amount, an equal amount for children in primary

:37:15. > :37:21.and secondary, we do then have the main drivers of additional funding

:37:22. > :37:26.being deprivation 5 billion a year, but also then driven by low prior

:37:27. > :37:29.attainment. I think that's the right way to have structured this formula

:37:30. > :37:33.to make sure that whilst we have seen progress in many schools in

:37:34. > :37:38.many parts of the country, we have to make sure that re-sourcing flows

:37:39. > :37:45.towards those areas that need a lift as well.

:37:46. > :37:50.The Minister for schools was kind enough to meet with me recently to

:37:51. > :37:57.discuss funding for schools in my constituency. My pupil funding is

:37:58. > :37:59.just over ?4000. My small rural schools face severe challenges

:38:00. > :38:07.because of their small size and location. A heavy read of sparsity

:38:08. > :38:12.is vital if we are to ensure that schools can continue avoiding a

:38:13. > :38:16.brilliant education. She is absolutely right. And of course,

:38:17. > :38:20.when we looked at the National funding formula mechanism, there are

:38:21. > :38:27.some local authorities who don't use a sparsity factor. We will be having

:38:28. > :38:29.one that goes to all schools that should be getting additional

:38:30. > :38:39.support. That is why I think this formula should be welcomed.

:38:40. > :38:46.Children in my constituency start school up to 19 months behind where

:38:47. > :38:50.they should be in terms of development, without fantastic

:38:51. > :38:54.teachers and extra resources, they struggle to fulfil their potential

:38:55. > :38:59.and play catch-up for the rest of their lives. Can the Secretary of

:39:00. > :39:05.State tell me and the schools in my constituency, will they see their

:39:06. > :39:10.funding increase, yes or no? There is a greater focus in this formula

:39:11. > :39:20.on prior attainment, which should address the question she has just

:39:21. > :39:27.asked. Under the current funding formula, our schools are the third

:39:28. > :39:30.worst in London. So having campaigned for changes with

:39:31. > :39:34.teachers, parents and councillors for fairer funding, I look forward

:39:35. > :39:37.to responding to the face to consultation. Can my right

:39:38. > :39:45.honourable friend confirmed that the mobility factor we called the real

:39:46. > :39:51.pressure Londoners face by children joining midterm in large numbers?

:39:52. > :39:57.I think it can. Obviously he will want to look at the detail. This

:39:58. > :40:00.will see us put ?23 million it is supporting those schools and those

:40:01. > :40:09.children who move in the year. I know this has been an issue in

:40:10. > :40:12.London. Not just in London. This was a general response from the

:40:13. > :40:15.consultation document, that we needed to put this into the

:40:16. > :40:22.consultation in phase two and it should be part of the four Miller.

:40:23. > :40:25.That's why we have done that. -- the formula. I am grateful to the

:40:26. > :40:30.Minister of schools for a listing to the case for adding mobility and

:40:31. > :40:37.grateful to the Secretary of State for her announcement. Should she not

:40:38. > :40:40.have secured the support of the Chancellor to make sure that no

:40:41. > :40:46.school will see a cut in the funding per pupil for that school, given the

:40:47. > :40:52.cost pressures she has referred to? I make two points. One is that

:40:53. > :40:57.despite the need to reduce our deficit over time, which is what

:40:58. > :41:02.this comment has set about, we have protected the core schools budget in

:41:03. > :41:06.real terms. In real terms, I recognise there is a need for

:41:07. > :41:12.reducing the year-on-year reductions schools would face. And indeed the

:41:13. > :41:20.overall reduction that any per pupil and will faces no more than 3%. I

:41:21. > :41:23.hope he will welcome that. Following that particular point, in

:41:24. > :41:32.the health service there is a similar fairer funding formula. It

:41:33. > :41:39.never catches up because they are not prepared to reduce the funding

:41:40. > :41:42.the best funded debt. I am slightly worried that that is suggesting that

:41:43. > :41:47.sort of thing will creep into this system. Are we ever actually going

:41:48. > :41:55.to move to the formula? Our schools actually going to get the cash?

:41:56. > :42:01.As I set out, in the transition year and the first year the formula

:42:02. > :42:06.operates in full and properly, some schools will get 3% who are so far

:42:07. > :42:10.behind that they are eligible, and for those schools even further

:42:11. > :42:16.behind, they will get a further 2.5% of the following year. It is now

:42:17. > :42:22.important that the schools that have been underfunded, that we see those

:42:23. > :42:26.changes come through. Schools in areas such as mine have a

:42:27. > :42:29.combination of exceptionally high costs, not least recruitment and

:42:30. > :42:34.retention, and high levels of deprivation. Yet schools are already

:42:35. > :42:39.begging staff redundant. The Secretary of State has blamed

:42:40. > :42:42.policies such as the National Living Wage. Why is the government

:42:43. > :42:47.introducing policies they are not prepared to fund?

:42:48. > :42:53.I am not sure if she supports the Living Wage. From our perspective,

:42:54. > :43:01.we think it is important. But we also think it is important to

:43:02. > :43:04.introduce this funding formula and I hope that MPs can support it as a

:43:05. > :43:09.mechanism to make sure that whatever funding is flowing into schools is

:43:10. > :43:13.delivered fairly. I also hope she can reflect the fact that it does

:43:14. > :43:17.ensure that those communities and those children growing up in

:43:18. > :43:20.deprived areas do see additional funding, and those children wherever

:43:21. > :43:28.they are growing up, whether deprived or might not, that they

:43:29. > :43:32.will receive additional funding. I very much welcomed the statement

:43:33. > :43:38.from my right honourable friend. One group we are overlooking here are

:43:39. > :43:42.our parents. Parents often say to me, I am paying the same rate of tax

:43:43. > :43:47.as people in other areas, why am I getting less money for my children

:43:48. > :43:50.in the state school system? I welcome this statement. And can I

:43:51. > :43:55.arrange my honourable friend that when she gets the backlash to stand

:43:56. > :43:56.fast particularly in support for auroral schools and to deliver it in

:43:57. > :44:05.full? Well, we are at the beginning of a

:44:06. > :44:07.14 week consultation now and I think it is important everyone looks at

:44:08. > :44:11.the formula we are now proposing. I do think it is a formula where we

:44:12. > :44:16.have the right balance and I hope it can command the broad support of the

:44:17. > :44:21.House. Madame Deputy Speaker, thank you. I represent the 19th most

:44:22. > :44:25.disadvantaged constituency in the country and the Secretary of State

:44:26. > :44:29.did speak about this advantage and deprivation. I wonder, can she just

:44:30. > :44:32.confirm for parents and schools in my constituency that they will

:44:33. > :44:37.receive more funding under this formula that is being proposed

:44:38. > :44:41.today, or will it be less? She can look at the details for her own

:44:42. > :44:44.constituency once all of the data is published, but I hope she can

:44:45. > :44:52.reflect on what I said earlier, which is that we have built and

:44:53. > :44:54.ensure funding follows children from particularly disadvantaged

:44:55. > :44:58.backgrounds into this for now, and we have not just looked at formal

:44:59. > :45:02.deprivation factor is that many local authorities had in place, but

:45:03. > :45:07.also some local authorities were virtually all children were from

:45:08. > :45:11.deprived backgrounds and there was not necessarily a formal factor

:45:12. > :45:14.reflecting that, so we try to capture nevertheless if you like the

:45:15. > :45:20.hidden funding flowing through to help deprived children as also as

:45:21. > :45:27.part of that factor. I will sit down now. For decades Staffordshire has

:45:28. > :45:34.language 15 from the bottom in being funded, and may I say to my right

:45:35. > :45:38.honourable friend, I have heard it all before? From Tony Blair, and as

:45:39. > :45:46.the honourable lady so charmingly put it the unelected Prime Minister

:45:47. > :45:49.Gordon Brown. Can I thank my honourable friend for coming up with

:45:50. > :45:52.a firm date for these reforms? Will she assured me the children of

:45:53. > :45:59.Staffordshire will no longer be disadvantaged? I believe this will

:46:00. > :46:06.be a fair funding formula that will be in everyone's and iss, including

:46:07. > :46:12.his constituents. Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. -- everyone's

:46:13. > :46:16.interests. I am extremely alarmed that pupils in Bishop Auckland are

:46:17. > :46:22.going to lose ?452 over the parliament. Could the Minister tell

:46:23. > :46:26.me what is going to happen in my constituency? She has reassured

:46:27. > :46:32.London MPs, has reassured the Home Counties, so in the interest of

:46:33. > :46:41.honesty, who are the losers out of the funding formula? I think in

:46:42. > :46:44.relation to the Nu T, we had terrible scaremongering from them in

:46:45. > :46:48.terms of numbers they put out -- the NUT. Which proved to be incorrect.

:46:49. > :46:53.They were seeing some schools would lose 10% under this funding formula.

:46:54. > :46:57.As I have set out that is absolutely not the case, and I would encourage

:46:58. > :46:59.her like all members to look at the data in relation to her own

:47:00. > :47:08.constituency. We will be publishing a lot of data ones this statement is

:47:09. > :47:11.done, as is the customary fashion, Madame Deputy Speaker, and that is

:47:12. > :47:14.because we want to be clear this is a big step forward in relation to

:47:15. > :47:16.schools funding and it is important we were clear with people about what

:47:17. > :47:23.the implications would be for their schools and that is what we have

:47:24. > :47:27.done. Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. I particularly welcome the

:47:28. > :47:31.reference to sparsity and mobility in her statement, great news for

:47:32. > :47:36.constituencies like mine. Would she agree with me that one of the most

:47:37. > :47:42.mobile populations are the families of Armed Forces? Will she say how

:47:43. > :47:50.she will promote the pupil premium we introduced in 2011 in the funding

:47:51. > :47:53.formula going forward? The pupil premium is largely unaffected by

:47:54. > :48:01.this but as he points out an element of it is now in place to ensure

:48:02. > :48:04.Forces families children do not get disadvantaged by people being posted

:48:05. > :48:07.to different places, as is often the case, and their children have to

:48:08. > :48:11.switch schools, one of the other reasons we were quite keen to make

:48:12. > :48:26.sure we had this issue of mobility carefully within the funding formula

:48:27. > :48:32.itself. I am so sorry... Let's just get some suspense into this debate!

:48:33. > :48:38.Let's just get some suspense into this debate!

:48:39. > :48:50.I met Helen Jones! Thank you. Schools in my constituency are among

:48:51. > :48:54.the worst funded in the country -- I meant. Schools are struggling now

:48:55. > :48:57.because of the actions this government is ticking. Cuts have

:48:58. > :49:01.taken money out of the dedicated schools grants. Schools are not

:49:02. > :49:10.adequately funded for legislation on special needs. What is the Secretary

:49:11. > :49:15.of State going to do to assist these schools now? Before the new funding

:49:16. > :49:25.formula comes in, and before it even more damage is done to the education

:49:26. > :49:30.of children in school now. She raises a number of different issues.

:49:31. > :49:33.In relation to local authorities, we have launched a strategic school

:49:34. > :49:36.improvement fund which makes sure we can see school improvement take

:49:37. > :49:39.place, particularly in those parts of the country where we have seen

:49:40. > :49:45.schools make less progress that we would have wanted. In relation to

:49:46. > :49:49.high needs, nor local areas will see reductions in the funding they get,

:49:50. > :49:56.but we will see those areas most underfunded get 3% gains of the

:49:57. > :50:01.2018, 2019 and 2020 years which I hope she will welcome -- no local

:50:02. > :50:04.areas will see reductions. I welcome this statement because Hampshire is

:50:05. > :50:08.the third lowest funded local authority in the country and faces

:50:09. > :50:14.significant pressures such as needing 9000 more secondary school

:50:15. > :50:21.places by 2025, and with a 40% of its schools largely not upgraded

:50:22. > :50:24.since the 1960s. Does the Secretary of State agree that what this

:50:25. > :50:27.proposal does is address the single biggest factor causing disparities

:50:28. > :50:32.around the country, that being the historical nature of the funding

:50:33. > :50:38.formula, and it will restore equality and fairness to the system?

:50:39. > :50:43.Yes, I do. It was not only arbitrary at central Government level but also

:50:44. > :50:47.at local authority levels for those formulas were set, eight bit in a

:50:48. > :50:51.second set of imbalances, so it is now time to tidy and clear that it

:50:52. > :50:57.but critically make sure it is fair and equal wherever children are.

:50:58. > :51:01.Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. She knows Nottingham schools face

:51:02. > :51:05.enormous challenges in raising educational standards in a city with

:51:06. > :51:07.high levels of deprivation. School leaders are already telling me they

:51:08. > :51:11.are struggling to cope and are facing huge difficulty in recruiting

:51:12. > :51:18.and retaining high-quality teachers. We know that all schools are facing

:51:19. > :51:23.a real terms cut in funding, but how does she suggest Headteachers and

:51:24. > :51:26.staff, parents and pupils, in Nottingham will feel when she says

:51:27. > :51:33.it is fair that their school is being cut even deeper to find

:51:34. > :51:37.increases in other places? I don't think anybody can really argue in

:51:38. > :51:44.favour of keeping a system in place that is simply a postcode lottery.

:51:45. > :51:48.That has very little, if any, relationship now between the needs

:51:49. > :51:54.of a school and indeed the underlying cost base often of the

:51:55. > :51:57.school is operating, baked how much the school and child then gets as

:51:58. > :52:01.funding. What we are setting out today is a formula I think genuinely

:52:02. > :52:05.addresses that. It is a 14 week consultation so there is plenty of

:52:06. > :52:08.time for members to look at the impact on their local area then take

:52:09. > :52:14.part in that consultation and I very much hope MPs will do that, Madame

:52:15. > :52:22.Deputy Speaker. Thank you. Can I warmly welcome this and a half of

:52:23. > :52:26.schools in Nottinghamshire who have been poorly funded role of them.

:52:27. > :52:32.Would she agree this is part of a lazy assumption in not addressing

:52:33. > :52:38.counties? Eye candy like Nottinghamshire has pocketed extreme

:52:39. > :52:45.deprivation, former coalfield communities -- places like

:52:46. > :52:49.Nottinghamshire. I agree strongly with him and I think this formula

:52:50. > :52:54.now enables us to have a proper validated evidence -based approach,

:52:55. > :53:00.including to deprivation, often driven by data, that is literally

:53:01. > :53:04.ten or more years out of date. It is time to fix that and that is what we

:53:05. > :53:07.are launching today. Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. Does she

:53:08. > :53:11.understand and recognise the grave concerns of schools in my

:53:12. > :53:20.constituency across Cumbria with above average numbers of children

:53:21. > :53:24.with high needs. The changes to the funding formula for teaching

:53:25. > :53:29.assistants for schools needing to fund now the first ten hours, rather

:53:30. > :53:33.than eight, is going to significantly impact on existing

:53:34. > :53:45.budgets and mean cuts in those schools? Is it not the case that the

:53:46. > :53:50.proposed floor and maintaining the existing budget will be of little

:53:51. > :53:53.help if current numbers of high needs pupils continue to rise? I

:53:54. > :53:59.would encourage him to look at the consultation and of course alongside

:54:00. > :54:03.having an element of funding for local areas based on historic

:54:04. > :54:08.spending levels which do vary, we will look at population and indeed

:54:09. > :54:11.needs within that. There are strong proxies for understanding how much

:54:12. > :54:14.funding we think should be flowing to different places and I think that

:54:15. > :54:19.will put us in a much clearer position but as I have been clear we

:54:20. > :54:26.will also as part of that make sure no area loses any funding as part of

:54:27. > :54:30.the transition. Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. Having wrestled with

:54:31. > :54:34.funding formula in education in local government for 20 years before

:54:35. > :54:40.I got elected to this place, I welcome the principle of fair

:54:41. > :54:43.funding and in particular sparsity and other elements contained. My

:54:44. > :54:46.right honourable friend as fellow London MP will know the cost of

:54:47. > :54:52.living in London is much higher than the rest of the country and clearly

:54:53. > :54:56.with 85% of the schools' budget typically spent on staffing, the

:54:57. > :55:06.need to pay staff extra star Laurie 's for recruitment and retention is

:55:07. > :55:12.paramount. -- extra wages. What will she do to protect schools from

:55:13. > :55:16.losing as a result? The area cost adjustment should enable us to do

:55:17. > :55:21.that effectively and as I said it is not just based on overall labour

:55:22. > :55:26.cost assumptions, but based on cost assumptions with teachers and so on

:55:27. > :55:29.so that should enable us to reflect that in the funding formula we now

:55:30. > :55:32.have in place. Of course he will be able to respond in the consultation

:55:33. > :55:37.but that is what we are trying to do. Thank you, Madame Deputy

:55:38. > :55:41.Speaker. I am grateful for the statement today from the Secretary

:55:42. > :55:45.of State. Would she underline and explain the flexible day between

:55:46. > :55:50.local authorities were for example in one of London tourist borrows, in

:55:51. > :55:58.2010 the funding for children services were ?102 million and will

:55:59. > :56:03.be on hundred and 46 ?9 when the populace has grown and the children

:56:04. > :56:13.are less needing, how will that be addressed in the consultation -- 140

:56:14. > :56:17.?6 million. In relation to the high needs fund we are now consulting on

:56:18. > :56:19.the ability for the local authorities who will still receive

:56:20. > :56:23.high needs funding to be able to share some of that with mainstream

:56:24. > :56:27.schools if that is how they feel there is a better way of creating to

:56:28. > :56:32.provide for special needs locally. Of course some special-needs

:56:33. > :56:40.children are in special schools and some are not. The figure was also

:56:41. > :56:43.about whether is funding for a local level that the funding should flow

:56:44. > :56:48.the opposite way from the schools' budget, perhaps because of the

:56:49. > :56:50.waiters delivered at a local level. That should be possible if there is

:56:51. > :56:56.agreement from the majority of schools on that -- because of the

:56:57. > :56:59.way it is delivered. There is a long-term approach that. But the

:57:00. > :57:06.whole point of this consultation is to get feedback on proposals. Thank

:57:07. > :57:10.you very much, Madame Deputy Speaker. I warmly welcome the

:57:11. > :57:15.statement on fairer funding for schools. It is not right

:57:16. > :57:20.constituency such as mine have a ?2000 difference per pupil to other

:57:21. > :57:22.constituencies. I noted with interest the Secretary of State

:57:23. > :57:27.identified one of the reasons was that the data is a decade out of

:57:28. > :57:31.date. Going forward it is absolutely fundamental we have the correct

:57:32. > :57:35.data. In areas of high growth, this is fundamentally important. Can she

:57:36. > :57:40.assure me in order to have the right number for the year going forward

:57:41. > :57:44.that the data will be collected sufficiently late in the year so we

:57:45. > :57:49.know the accurate figures for the following school year per pupil?

:57:50. > :57:54.Well, on deprivation we will be using, as part of the figures,

:57:55. > :57:59.essentially an index looking at how deprivation affects children and in

:58:00. > :58:01.particular that was last updated recently so it gives us fresh

:58:02. > :58:08.database to use. Of course in relation to broader characteristics,

:58:09. > :58:14.the census gets updated in October every year and that feeds into the

:58:15. > :58:19.following academic year gear's funding formula detail, so those two

:58:20. > :58:25.think should mean we can have up to date data -- the following academic

:58:26. > :58:29.year's funding formula. This reform to the funding formula, which many

:58:30. > :58:33.of us agree on, would have been much easier had the Chancellor given some

:58:34. > :58:36.additional money to fund some of these changes, which in a degree?

:58:37. > :58:41.Let me say, is it not the case that every single school in the country

:58:42. > :58:46.notwithstanding what she has said will face real term cuts in those

:58:47. > :58:50.doing in their budgets even those who think they have gained from the

:58:51. > :58:54.funding for not? And to pick up on something specific she has said,

:58:55. > :58:58.which she said was one of the ways of tackling disadvantage, the pupil

:58:59. > :59:04.premium, it is interesting what discussion took place around that.

:59:05. > :59:06.The Secretary of State said it will be protected at current rates

:59:07. > :59:09.throughout the remainder of this Parliament. Can she confirm whether

:59:10. > :59:11.that means current rates as they are now or in real terms increase

:59:12. > :59:21.through the Parliament? We will continue to put ?2.5 billion

:59:22. > :59:26.into the pupil premium. That is separate to the funding on top of

:59:27. > :59:31.core funding rates that is part of the consultation we are setting out

:59:32. > :59:39.today. Bowles -- both of these things indicate that the government

:59:40. > :59:44.is supporting children in the toughest part of the country and

:59:45. > :59:51.most likely not to emerge from the system with the outcomes to fulfil

:59:52. > :59:54.their potential. The people of Worcestershire will welcome this

:59:55. > :59:59.statement because funding per pupil is ?1000 per head lower than

:00:00. > :00:02.neighbouring areas. Does the Secretary of State recognise that

:00:03. > :00:06.not everybody who lives in the countryside is living in a rural

:00:07. > :00:10.idyll and that there are pockets of deprivation ride across the

:00:11. > :00:15.countryside, including my constituency? Investing in our

:00:16. > :00:20.children's future based on need and fairness is absolutely the right

:00:21. > :00:23.move. He is absolutely right. That is why it is so important that we

:00:24. > :00:29.move to a sensible approach on looking at how deprivation should be

:00:30. > :00:33.dealt with. We need to take a broader approach than just children

:00:34. > :00:38.eligible for free school meals. We will be looking at three components.

:00:39. > :00:43.Existing eligibility for free school meals. Children who have been ever

:00:44. > :00:50.-- eligible for free school meals in the last three years. And the

:00:51. > :00:56.broader definition of the index that captures a broader definition of

:00:57. > :01:04.deprivation. Teachers are increasingly telling me about the

:01:05. > :01:10.funding they receive. Young people in my constituency are at a

:01:11. > :01:16.disadvantage she specifically quoted Halton. Can I ask a specific

:01:17. > :01:20.question? What is the actual real terms increase going to be for

:01:21. > :01:30.wholesome pupils? She must know that. -- Halton. I quoted what the

:01:31. > :01:33.current position was. He will no doubt be interested to look at the

:01:34. > :01:47.details in relation to his own local community. When the statement is

:01:48. > :01:51.finally finished. Schools in York have some of the lowest it's not the

:01:52. > :01:57.lowest per pupil funding in the country. Some schools in London

:01:58. > :02:04.receive more than ?3000 per pupil more. Leaving schools in York on the

:02:05. > :02:07.brink of making some very difficult decisions despite delivering

:02:08. > :02:11.excellent education. What message will be Secretary of State give to

:02:12. > :02:15.schools that have been waiting for this announcement for far too long

:02:16. > :02:20.and wants to see it implemented as soon a spot of. --? This will be a

:02:21. > :02:26.fairer approach for all schools, including those in your. We are

:02:27. > :02:28.taking steps to introduce it rapidly during the course of this

:02:29. > :02:33.Parliament. Order. I hope that everyone who

:02:34. > :02:36.wishes to ask a question will have an opportunity. Now that the

:02:37. > :02:39.Secretary of State has been answering questions for more than an

:02:40. > :02:47.hour, it would be appropriate if questions were short and sharp, or

:02:48. > :02:52.we will be here all day. Funding should be related to need.

:02:53. > :02:57.This is a long-standing problem. But in Liverpool, one of the most

:02:58. > :03:03.deprived areas, over 58% of the budget has already gone. And the NUT

:03:04. > :03:08.say that over ?602 per year per pupil will be launched -- lost under

:03:09. > :03:11.the government programme. Can she guarantee that the students of

:03:12. > :03:16.Liverpool will not lose out in this redistribution of funds? I would

:03:17. > :03:22.encourage her to look at the details that we will release by area and by

:03:23. > :03:27.school and really just to give her some reassurance, this is a formula

:03:28. > :03:32.that absolutely wants to ensure that we direct funding fairly but also

:03:33. > :03:35.where there is need, whether in terms of disadvantage or low prior

:03:36. > :03:42.attainment. We also think it should be driven by data as has been seen

:03:43. > :03:50.-- that is more up-to-date. I would encourage her to look at the

:03:51. > :03:53.consultation and the details. Madam Deputy Speaker, I welcome the

:03:54. > :03:57.statement today. Schools in Cornwall will be grateful that at long last

:03:58. > :04:00.the historic underfunding of our schools in Cornwall is at last being

:04:01. > :04:09.addressed. I am pleased to be part of the government addressing this

:04:10. > :04:15.issue. I would like to talk about the issue of pupil premium based on

:04:16. > :04:18.eligibility for free school meals. It is difficult to get parents to

:04:19. > :04:22.register for free school meals because of personal choice or

:04:23. > :04:29.stigma. Yet this data is already held by other departments. Can we

:04:30. > :04:31.not ensure that people can be automatically -- pupils are

:04:32. > :04:37.automatically registered for free school meals? I think he raises an

:04:38. > :04:41.important point. We do want to see all children who are eligible for

:04:42. > :04:44.the pupil premium and free school meals properly registered. We have

:04:45. > :04:50.done a lot of work to make sure that is the case. There is still a

:04:51. > :04:58.challenge ahead of us. I am looking forward to that.

:04:59. > :05:02.Thank you to the Secretary of State for answering the questions so far.

:05:03. > :05:09.I do not resent at all the idea that members representing them --

:05:10. > :05:13.constituents. The problem I do have is that that should not be at the

:05:14. > :05:18.cost of urban schools, where significant levels of deprivation

:05:19. > :05:24.exist. In Oldham there will be a loss of ?400 per pupil under this

:05:25. > :05:30.new formula. For some schools it could be up to ?600 per pupil. The

:05:31. > :05:34.town is already struggling to recruit and retain good quality

:05:35. > :05:42.teachers. It is one of the areas being looked at under special

:05:43. > :05:49.prevention. Can I have a guarantee that we will not get into an

:05:50. > :05:51.argument about us versus them and ensure that every school has

:05:52. > :05:57.sufficient funding to meet demand and need? I have allowed the

:05:58. > :06:01.honourable gentleman some leeway because he has waited a long time to

:06:02. > :06:07.put his question. It doesn't therefore follow that he should take

:06:08. > :06:09.twice as long to put it. I don't criticise him specifically today but

:06:10. > :06:16.I hope that we can be a little faster now. Secretary of State. I am

:06:17. > :06:20.sure that he will want to see the impact on his own local

:06:21. > :06:31.constituency. But I think this formula is a step forward to ensure

:06:32. > :06:36.that... Money follows disadvantage and need.

:06:37. > :06:40.That is the right formula to take. I'm very grateful to the Secretary

:06:41. > :06:43.of State and the schools Minister for listening to my concerns and

:06:44. > :06:51.those of so many in the south-west. I congratulate them on addressing on

:06:52. > :06:55.fairness that schools in the wells constituency have had to ensure.

:06:56. > :07:00.Does she agree this is the start of a series of investment in the

:07:01. > :07:04.south-west that will create an imbalance in funding to our region

:07:05. > :07:12.and that the Secretary of State has blazed a trail that other

:07:13. > :07:14.departments will surely follow? That was a fantastic question. I

:07:15. > :07:19.would also like to take the opportunity to thank my right

:07:20. > :07:22.honourable friend, the Minister of schools, further work E has put into

:07:23. > :07:28.this relatively context piece of work that we have undertaken. We

:07:29. > :07:32.want to see children in the south-west achieve their potential.

:07:33. > :07:38.This is a funding formula that will mean there is fairer funding for the

:07:39. > :07:44.first time. That, I believe, will help children in his local

:07:45. > :07:48.community. Of course I'm delighted today

:07:49. > :07:54.speaking for the county of Cambridge, one of the lowest funded

:07:55. > :08:00.in recent decades. I don't wish to be ungrateful but last year the

:08:01. > :08:11.funding was swallowed by pension and national insurance increases. The

:08:12. > :08:21.number of pupils is going up. High cost of living. Please, please,

:08:22. > :08:27.please look at that funding again. We will be rolling forward. But I

:08:28. > :08:32.think it underlines why it is important we put place a final

:08:33. > :08:35.funding formula. That is what the consultation is on. It will affect

:08:36. > :08:37.areas that have been underfunded for a very long time. That is why we

:08:38. > :08:55.need to on with it. West Sussex has historically always

:08:56. > :09:01.suffered from very low funding and also very high costs outside of the

:09:02. > :09:07.London weighting. Can the Secretary of State give me any reassurance

:09:08. > :09:13.that we will benefit from cost adjustment? I hope he will see some

:09:14. > :09:15.improvement in the way in which funding is working following the

:09:16. > :09:20.adoption of this fair funding formula. He mentions costs. That is

:09:21. > :09:25.why one of the key factors building is an area of cost adjustment, to

:09:26. > :09:30.make sure that schools which are in locations with higher in eight cost

:09:31. > :09:34.bases have that reflected in the funding that pupils have attached to

:09:35. > :09:38.them. I welcome this statement. Does the

:09:39. > :09:41.Secretary of State agree with me that it starts to address the myth

:09:42. > :09:48.that constituencies like Cheltenham and Gloucester do not have areas of

:09:49. > :09:52.deprivation? Cheltenham has intense urban challenges and this addresses

:09:53. > :09:58.funding on the basis of need and not postcode. I strongly agree with him.

:09:59. > :10:02.Until now, school funding has been the ultimate postcode lottery.

:10:03. > :10:07.Funding is being overly determined by where children are growing up.

:10:08. > :10:13.That is completely unacceptable. If we're going to make Britain a

:10:14. > :10:15.country where all children can progress, we have to get on with

:10:16. > :10:26.fairer funding. And the prize for patients --

:10:27. > :10:32.patience goes to Jason McCartney. Thank you. Merry Christmas to you.

:10:33. > :10:40.How far will the inclusion of a sparsity factor go in protecting

:10:41. > :10:44.small and rural schools, which are so important particularly to my

:10:45. > :10:49.local community? I think it will help. It will go together with a

:10:50. > :10:53.fixed lump sum that is part of this formula. Overall we see that on

:10:54. > :10:59.average small rural schools will benefit from this formula.

:11:00. > :11:06.I thank the Secretary of State. Order. Point of order.

:11:07. > :11:12.I'm very grateful to you. On a point of order, last week government plans

:11:13. > :11:17.were announced this close Havant of Glasgow's jobs centres. They were

:11:18. > :11:20.supposed to be getting a consultation on several of these

:11:21. > :11:28.closures. I have raised this with the minister. It is now a week later

:11:29. > :11:32.and still it doesn't appear on the DWP website. Given it is happening

:11:33. > :11:38.over Christmas, you can understand my frustration and my constituents'

:11:39. > :11:41.frustration. I wonder if you can help me, madam Deputy Speaker, and

:11:42. > :11:48.give me some guidance as to how I can make the Minister gets US -- get

:11:49. > :11:53.it up on the website? It is not on that a week later it is not

:11:54. > :11:56.therefore public consumption. I thank the honourable gentleman for

:11:57. > :12:01.his point of order and for having indicated to me that he intended to

:12:02. > :12:04.make such a point of order. He will appreciate that of course it is not

:12:05. > :12:10.a matter that I can address from the chair. The chair, of course, has no

:12:11. > :12:16.power whatsoever to make ministers do what members are asking those

:12:17. > :12:23.ministers to do. But I do know that the honourable gentleman and his

:12:24. > :12:26.colleagues, with some passion and understandable commitment, have

:12:27. > :12:29.raised this matter several times in the House. I understand the

:12:30. > :12:36.honourable gentleman has an adjournment debate in Westminster

:12:37. > :12:42.Hall next week. I hope that is correct. That is the correct place

:12:43. > :12:46.in which to air a matter like this in some detail. But at the same

:12:47. > :12:50.time, in having raised the matter now at this busy time in the

:12:51. > :12:55.chamber, I'm quite sure that the Treasury bench will have noted what

:12:56. > :13:00.the honourable gentleman has said, will have appreciated that the

:13:01. > :13:04.matter is of great importance in the honourable gentleman's constituency,

:13:05. > :13:13.and that action will come soon from the relevant department.

:13:14. > :13:19.Point of order. Prior to the statement we heard just now, the

:13:20. > :13:23.member for Brighton Pavilion raised an important issue on Southern Rail

:13:24. > :13:29.and the present strikes victimising passengers. But the member for

:13:30. > :13:32.Brighton Pavilion failed to condemn the unions and also failed to

:13:33. > :13:38.declare an interest in the chamber as a recipient of funding from RMT.

:13:39. > :13:41.As a new member of Parliament, can you please advise me on the protocol

:13:42. > :13:50.of declarations of interest in the chamber?

:13:51. > :13:56.I am grateful for the honourable lady for raising an important matter

:13:57. > :14:02.like this. It is vital that in order to keep the proceedings of this

:14:03. > :14:06.place open and accountable, that where appropriate, a member should

:14:07. > :14:12.always declare an interest where that member has an interest. But it

:14:13. > :14:16.is not a matter for the chair or for me at the particular moment to make

:14:17. > :14:19.a judgment as to whether any particular member should have

:14:20. > :14:21.declared an interest at any particular moment. What I would say

:14:22. > :14:29.to the honourable lady and generally to the house, that members would be

:14:30. > :14:34.advised to on the side of and accountability. And where they think

:14:35. > :14:41.there might be an interest to declare, they really ought to

:14:42. > :14:46.declare that interest. Point of order Mrs Goodman. Madam Deputy

:14:47. > :14:53.Speaker, you will understand my delight and pleasure that for

:14:54. > :14:58.international trade and questions tomorrow, I came out at number two,

:14:59. > :15:01.my question was whether or not his department has made an assessment of

:15:02. > :15:08.the potential effect of leaving the EU customs union on level of

:15:09. > :15:16.employment? I subsequently received an e-mail from the Department saying

:15:17. > :15:22.that this matter has been transferred to another department.

:15:23. > :15:25.However Madam Deputy Speaker, the member for Sunderland Central has a

:15:26. > :15:29.question on the order paper, what is the impact of the customs union and

:15:30. > :15:37.levels of foreign investment into the UK. And another member has a

:15:38. > :15:40.question about the potential effect of leaving the custom union on

:15:41. > :15:44.future trade agreements? Madam Deputy Speaker, how can we know to

:15:45. > :15:50.which government department to address our questions? I can quite

:15:51. > :15:53.understand why the Department for International trade doesn't want to

:15:54. > :15:59.answer my question, because it is a very large increase in armed -- in

:16:00. > :16:04.unemployment that would be created. But can we have some consistency for

:16:05. > :16:09.the government benches. I fully appreciate the point that the

:16:10. > :16:17.honourable lady is making. But she also knows that it is not a matter

:16:18. > :16:22.for the chair to decide which department should answer which

:16:23. > :16:27.question. That is and always has been a matter for the government to

:16:28. > :16:31.allocate. I can understand the honourable lady's disappointment,

:16:32. > :16:38.that she was hoping tomorrow to have her question addressed here on the

:16:39. > :16:45.floor of the house. And she is understandably disappointed. I would

:16:46. > :16:49.say two things to her, the first is that regardless of which department

:16:50. > :16:58.her question is answered by, I am sure she will get the same answer.

:16:59. > :17:05.And secondly, that having so eloquently made her point today, I

:17:06. > :17:10.hope that Mr Speaker will look favourably on the honourable lady

:17:11. > :17:13.when he calls the honourable member for Sunderland Central and the

:17:14. > :17:19.others she mentioned to ask that question tomorrow of the Secretary

:17:20. > :17:22.of State for International state -- International trade, that she might

:17:23. > :17:26.have an opportunity to ask her question. Whether she gets an answer

:17:27. > :17:33.or not is not a matter for me. Order. If there are no further

:17:34. > :17:44.points of order, we will move swiftly on to the ten minute rule

:17:45. > :17:50.motion, Mr Neil Gray. I beg to move that leave be given to bring in a

:17:51. > :17:55.bill that requires contracts to be regulated by the Financial Conduct

:17:56. > :17:59.Authority and to amend the financial services and markets act of 2000

:18:00. > :18:05.accordingly. And for connected purposes. I rise to propose this

:18:06. > :18:11.bill as a result of a Scottish Government commission report

:18:12. > :18:18.entitled "Funeral poverty in Scotland." It was written about

:18:19. > :18:22.citizens in Scotland, from the working group on funeral poverty. It

:18:23. > :18:26.is a report Scotland has accepted and one of the recommendations is to

:18:27. > :18:33.address the regulation of prepaid funeral plans. I thank others for

:18:34. > :18:38.their work on this bill proposal. I also wish to thank the fair funerals

:18:39. > :18:43.campaign who have supported me in the run-up to today. Before I begin

:18:44. > :18:48.in earnest, I should say I am an advocate of funeral plans is the

:18:49. > :18:52.best means to avoid funeral poverty. They allow people to pay in advance,

:18:53. > :18:57.in full or in instalments for their own funeral. I've also had meetings

:18:58. > :19:01.with the SCA and the funeral planning authority which is the

:19:02. > :19:05.industries 's internal regulator to discuss this proposal. They were

:19:06. > :19:08.both constructive in their response to me. It was welcome to the

:19:09. > :19:13.supportive statements this morning from the National Association of

:19:14. > :19:18.funeral directors and from one of the largest funeral plan providers.

:19:19. > :19:26.It seems we approaching a consensus that change is required. I am

:19:27. > :19:31.proposing the bill of a 90% in the cost of funerals in the last decade.

:19:32. > :19:35.North Lanarkshire Council has increased burial and cremation

:19:36. > :19:39.charges by 30 numbers and busy, the steepest rise in Scotland. The

:19:40. > :19:44.average funeral has risen by 7% in Scotland as a result in the past

:19:45. > :19:48.year. An average funeral in the UK, you are unlikely to get much change

:19:49. > :19:54.from ?4000. The Scottish Government is taking action in these areas and

:19:55. > :19:59.will next year published a funeral costs plan to address the main

:20:00. > :20:02.drivers of funeral poverty. It is also committing to process

:20:03. > :20:07.application from the funeral payment in ten working days and to reach

:20:08. > :20:15.more of those in need to reduce the reliance on borrowing to pay for

:20:16. > :20:18.funerals. But the additional costs described earlier are placing an

:20:19. > :20:23.unfavourable burden on the already stretched finances of the aggrieved

:20:24. > :20:27.families now. Many of whom are getting into serious and

:20:28. > :20:31.unmanageable debt when they lose a loved one. Something that has been

:20:32. > :20:36.raised in this house before by honourable members for Belfast East

:20:37. > :20:43.and Swansea, who support this bill, as well as the honourable member for

:20:44. > :20:47.Blackpool and South Shields. People are rightly turning to funeral plans

:20:48. > :20:52.as a way of addressing this incredible financial press which

:20:53. > :20:56.often arises suddenly and is placed on family members. Funeral plans are

:20:57. > :21:01.like vouchers for funerals paid in advance for redemption when the

:21:02. > :21:05.policyholder passes away. People can sign a contract saying how they want

:21:06. > :21:09.the funeral to take place and pay for it in advance. There is also an

:21:10. > :21:16.added advantage that you can secure the funeral at today's prices.

:21:17. > :21:22.Funeral plans are described in part 59 of the financial services act in

:21:23. > :21:26.2000 and in 2001, and in clause 60 and details how these plans can be

:21:27. > :21:32.exempted from FCO regulation if the funeral plan company undertakes to

:21:33. > :21:35.secure the funds paid by the customer through life insurance or

:21:36. > :21:41.if they hold the funds in trust with some further stipulations about how

:21:42. > :21:46.that should be handled afterwards. The whole insurance, life insurance,

:21:47. > :21:54.for the over 50s market needs looking at. But it is not the focus

:21:55. > :21:57.of this particular proposal. I have spoken to the Chief Executive of the

:21:58. > :22:03.FPA and he understands my concerns and those raised by CAS. I also know

:22:04. > :22:10.he is not responsible for all funeral plans but it does its best

:22:11. > :22:14.to satisfy complaints when they arise. There is need for a debate on

:22:15. > :22:19.whether the current system is the best way to ensure consumer

:22:20. > :22:22.confidence in what will be a more important area of the market in

:22:23. > :22:26.coming years. Citizens advice Scotland in compiling the report

:22:27. > :22:33.found evidence of some mis-selling by some funeral salespeople. Some

:22:34. > :22:38.cover the associated costs for the funeral but others only cost basic

:22:39. > :22:42.funeral director costs. It has been suggested that some salespeople are

:22:43. > :22:47.misleading customers as to what is included in the contract they are

:22:48. > :22:50.signing up to. One person said "They were very pushy and I think trying

:22:51. > :22:57.to pull the wool over my eyes. I knew the amount was not enough to

:22:58. > :23:00.cover the cost so I think they can mislead people." This calls into

:23:01. > :23:06.question the practices of some of the salespeople involved in funeral

:23:07. > :23:10.plan contracts. Some of these are third-party salespeople who are paid

:23:11. > :23:14.on a commission basis which makes me a little uncomfortable as this can

:23:15. > :23:18.encourage people to chase harder for sales than two ensure the consumer

:23:19. > :23:24.is aware and happy what they have signed to. Indeed, Charles Flanagan,

:23:25. > :23:27.the manager of the McLaren funeral director in my constituency has said

:23:28. > :23:32.that when he asks is customers why they have chosen to take a plan with

:23:33. > :23:35.him, the majority say that apparently it is because they are

:23:36. > :23:41.fed up of cold calling by funeral plan companies. That is of major

:23:42. > :23:45.concern to me and will concern others in this house as well. He has

:23:46. > :23:49.also given me numerous examples of elderly people who have been coerced

:23:50. > :23:52.into buying plans that are either more expensive than necessary or

:23:53. > :24:00.where the customer has not been asked any questions of relevance and

:24:01. > :24:07.specificity over the funeral they desire. There is a cooling off

:24:08. > :24:11.period, one was told that the funeral director of choice had

:24:12. > :24:15.refused the funeral plans but others might carry it out. The gentleman

:24:16. > :24:19.had specifically purchased the plan in order to be with that particular

:24:20. > :24:24.funeral director, who informed him that he had been mis-sold the plan

:24:25. > :24:28.as it did not include all of what he had wished for his funeral. Mr

:24:29. > :24:32.Flanagan is particular keen to see closer involvement of funeral

:24:33. > :24:38.directors in the selling of funeral plans as to avoid the unintended

:24:39. > :24:40.issues in the contract arising. Heather Kennedy from the fair

:24:41. > :24:45.funerals campaign says there are excellent funeral companies who are

:24:46. > :24:50.rising to the challenge presented by funeral poverty. The prices are

:24:51. > :24:54.transparent and they talk openly about money and make different

:24:55. > :24:57.options available. Mike any other industry, there are others who do

:24:58. > :25:03.not and are charging too much for their plans and at need funerals. I

:25:04. > :25:08.hope that some of those concerns and some of those areas of concern may

:25:09. > :25:13.be addressed here. Another example of a case study was highlighted by

:25:14. > :25:19.the East of Scotland bureau which had a client complaint, the client

:25:20. > :25:27.felt that no matter what she does, she was not going to get the funeral

:25:28. > :25:30.she wanted or planned for. She was told it could be at any funeral

:25:31. > :25:34.director and would cover all the cost. It later turned out after she

:25:35. > :25:37.signed the contract that the nearest funeral director who would honour

:25:38. > :25:41.the contract was 30 miles away and she would only get the basics from

:25:42. > :25:45.the funeral director. The director she wanted to administer the funeral

:25:46. > :25:50.will not do it because it is with another company and it is said she

:25:51. > :25:55.will lose a lot of money if she cancels and she has got nowhere with

:25:56. > :25:58.the complaint. And finally, as provision of funeral plans is not

:25:59. > :26:03.covered by the financial services compensation is scheme that protects

:26:04. > :26:08.against insolvency events and poor they covered by the vital ombudsman

:26:09. > :26:13.service which provides independent complaints and adjudication service

:26:14. > :26:17.free to the customer. I do note that the FPA has taken action to address

:26:18. > :26:22.these criticisms. It would be a bonus if this was enacted by the

:26:23. > :26:26.government that is the schemes would be open to offer additional consumer

:26:27. > :26:31.confidence. In conclusion, what I hope is that by proposing this bill,

:26:32. > :26:34.in my view, a very reasonable bill, the UK Government will looks it was

:26:35. > :26:40.the at this issue and ensure dialogue to make sure that

:26:41. > :26:46.consumers, often in a vulnerable state, are protected adequately. The

:26:47. > :26:51.question is that the honourable member has lead to bring in the

:26:52. > :26:58.bill, as many of that opinion say I macro, to the contrary, no macro.

:26:59. > :27:05.The ayes have it. Who will bring in the bill. Liz Southwell Roberts,

:27:06. > :27:10.Dina Johnston, Mr Jacob Rees-Mogg, Sir David Amis, Debbie Robinson,

:27:11. > :27:36.Calum Harris, Rosie Cooper and myself, Madam Deputy Speaker.

:27:37. > :27:47.Find the regulation of funeral services bill. Second reading what

:27:48. > :27:58.day? 24th every sentence 2017. 24th every 2017. -- 24th of February. We

:27:59. > :28:01.come to the first of the opposition day 16th allotted Day motions on the

:28:02. > :28:11.affect on equality the Autumn Statement 2016. I informed the house

:28:12. > :28:18.that Mr Speaker has selected amendment a in the name of the Prime

:28:19. > :28:22.Minister. I call Sarah Champion. It is a real pleasure to be here today

:28:23. > :28:26.on this important topic. The advancement of equal rights for

:28:27. > :28:29.women is often associated with certain historical milestone such as

:28:30. > :28:34.the right to vote, the moment to end violence against women and girls and

:28:35. > :28:37.reproductive rights. While these are of the hugely important, the key

:28:38. > :28:41.facet of the ongoing battle for gender equality is gender economic

:28:42. > :28:45.equality. Many women never question the right to open a bank account,

:28:46. > :28:49.and property or even buy wine or beer in a pub. These rights are now

:28:50. > :28:57.taken for granted but they were hard-won.

:28:58. > :29:05.Years ago having a job was a sign of financial desperation. It was only

:29:06. > :29:10.in the 19th-century women were allowed to own their own homes.

:29:11. > :29:15.Common law in Britain deprived women of the right to have their own

:29:16. > :29:20.property or hold their own money. As late as the 70s, working women were

:29:21. > :29:25.refused mortgages in their own right and were only granted mortgages if

:29:26. > :29:31.they could secure a male guarantor. It is only since 1980 that women

:29:32. > :29:36.were able to apply for credit in their own names. Did wasn't until

:29:37. > :29:40.1982 that women were allowed to spend their own money in pubs with

:29:41. > :29:46.the confidence they would be served these changes involved their lives

:29:47. > :29:51.and outspoken people challenging the status quo and pushing governments

:29:52. > :29:56.and society to the realisation that economic equality and independence

:29:57. > :29:59.for women must be the norm. Labour are pushing for the next step today

:30:00. > :30:07.in this battle for economic equality. And for the government to

:30:08. > :30:10.make sure their policies advance. And not hinder progress.

:30:11. > :30:14.Unfortunately, all the evidence points to the party opposite turning

:30:15. > :30:18.back the agenda on economic equality and nowhere has it been more

:30:19. > :30:23.apparent than in their major announcements such as the Autumn

:30:24. > :30:29.Statement. Research from the House of Commons library commissioned by

:30:30. > :30:34.this side of the Has has revealed that 86% of net savings to the

:30:35. > :30:38.Treasury through tax and benefit changes since 2010 will come from

:30:39. > :30:44.women. That's up from last year 's Autumn Statement but it has remained

:30:45. > :30:49.the same as the budget from earlier that year. If you are a woman black

:30:50. > :30:55.minority ethnic background you are set to lose out even more by this

:30:56. > :30:59.government. Joint analysis has shown that low income black and Asian

:31:00. > :31:04.women are paying the highest price for this government's failed

:31:05. > :31:11.austerity agenda. Which she agree that when we talk

:31:12. > :31:17.about the disproportionate cuts from women, what it is in practice so

:31:18. > :31:22.often is the children going without and that's why we've seen the huge

:31:23. > :31:26.spike in charge poverty turning back all the good work the previous

:31:27. > :31:32.Labour government did. My honourable friend has long been a campaign in

:31:33. > :31:37.this area and she is right. I don't understand why people don't consider

:31:38. > :31:42.the economic impact on the entire country if we hold back sectors of

:31:43. > :31:48.our population. Will the Honourable lady except that

:31:49. > :31:52.we have more women who have jobs than in the rest of Europe? And we

:31:53. > :31:58.want them to reach their full economic potential rather than at

:31:59. > :32:05.the moment when they get paid less than they ought. Individuals in the

:32:06. > :32:11.poorest households lose most fun tax benefit changes but from every

:32:12. > :32:19.income group, these women will lose a disproportionate amount. The

:32:20. > :32:25.women's budget group has highlighted analysis such showing disabled

:32:26. > :32:29.people lose significantly more as a result of tax and benefit changes

:32:30. > :32:34.than non-disabled people and disabled women lose more than

:32:35. > :32:38.disabled men. Disabled men are losing nine times as much income as

:32:39. > :32:42.non-disabled men. Disabled women lose twice as much income as

:32:43. > :32:50.non-disabled women. Families with disabled adults and children will

:32:51. > :32:55.lose over 5000 a year by 2020 as a result of tax and benefit changes.

:32:56. > :33:01.Families with both disabled adults and disabled children will lose

:33:02. > :33:06.services valuing 9000 year up to 2020. I would ask the minister

:33:07. > :33:10.whether they believe the figure is acceptable and in line with

:33:11. > :33:13.assertions from the Prime Minister and Chancellor that their party

:33:14. > :33:18.other champions of equality and fairness. We know that budget and

:33:19. > :33:24.policy decisions are simply not gender neutral.

:33:25. > :33:33.Thank you. That she recognise that what she seems to be suggesting is

:33:34. > :33:42.no plan, no sustainability? Will she accept that welfare spending tripled

:33:43. > :33:48.in real terms between 1980 and 1981 to 2014 and 2015 and that science

:33:49. > :33:54.does -- unsustainable. What you propose doesn't balance the books. I

:33:55. > :33:58.think I thank the honourable lady for her intervention. Does she

:33:59. > :34:03.recognise that there are groups in our society now that are being made

:34:04. > :34:10.more poor by this government? That is the position we are at and that's

:34:11. > :34:14.what statistics show us. It has been proven that gender differentials are

:34:15. > :34:20.not recognised by this government and assumptions are made that

:34:21. > :34:25.includes diocese. Women are particularly burnable to being hit

:34:26. > :34:29.hard by Gulf -- government policies. Social Security payments make up the

:34:30. > :34:40.greater share of women's income than men. Women pay less direct tax than

:34:41. > :34:46.men. Also because they tend to and less. Women make greater use of

:34:47. > :34:52.public services than men. And use care services. Because a higher

:34:53. > :34:55.proportion of women's employment is in the public sector than men's

:34:56. > :35:02.also. How are these factors taken into account in the draft of the

:35:03. > :35:06.most recent Autumn Statement? Labour has committed to a gender audit

:35:07. > :35:09.statement in government and the game would be for gender equality to be a

:35:10. > :35:16.significant element in considering policy options to ensure that the

:35:17. > :35:23.option contains no legal, economic social cultural constraints in the

:35:24. > :35:28.measures it proposes. It assures the policy is implemented in a gender

:35:29. > :35:33.sensitive and equitable manner. This process is often referred to as

:35:34. > :35:38.gender auditing now takes place in more than 40 countries and was

:35:39. > :35:41.originally inspired by countries such as Australia and given further

:35:42. > :35:47.momentum is by the United Nations commitment to gender monitoring. I

:35:48. > :35:52.would like to draw attention to the house of two examples of best

:35:53. > :35:59.practice. Sweden and Spain. Gender impact assessment is a common --

:36:00. > :36:06.relatively common instrument. It is strongly embedded in carried out by

:36:07. > :36:11.different levels of government. Gender impact assessments are most

:36:12. > :36:14.regularly performed when drawing up documents such as government bills

:36:15. > :36:21.and in terms of reference for enquiry committees. The impact

:36:22. > :36:26.assessment is conducted in the gender mainstreaming strategy. In

:36:27. > :36:34.Spain, gender impact assessments are required by law in the Basque

:36:35. > :36:38.country since 2005. Since 2007, gender impact assessment reports

:36:39. > :36:43.have been issued on more than 500 decrees and laws and after seven

:36:44. > :36:47.years it is a consolidated practice strongly embedded in the Basque

:36:48. > :36:55.regional government. These are just two examples to demonstrate that

:36:56. > :37:00.when it comes to wider policy, party opposite is light years behind some

:37:01. > :37:03.of our European colleagues. Can I ask what gender impact

:37:04. > :37:08.assessment she has made of the credit crunch and the record deficit

:37:09. > :37:14.we inherited? Does she not recognise the decisions we had to take word to

:37:15. > :37:21.restore the nation's finances which Irene everyone's interests are not a

:37:22. > :37:26.narrow interest group? I hear what you are saying but can I question

:37:27. > :37:29.him that why it is that women need to bear the brunt of this

:37:30. > :37:35.government's posterity? Will the Minister agree that macro I'm sorry,

:37:36. > :37:42.I'm not having a conversation. Following the example set by any

:37:43. > :37:44.other nations, will the Minister produce recommendations on how

:37:45. > :37:50.equality considerations can be better integrated -- integrated into

:37:51. > :37:54.their policy-making process? I think she mentioned Spain as a country

:37:55. > :38:01.doing the gender impact assessment. According to the global gender in

:38:02. > :38:10.Dax of 2016, what did she think about Britain ranking higher than

:38:11. > :38:18.Spain? Then how much better we would be if we actually actively audited

:38:19. > :38:22.what we were doing. The legal and international obligations on this

:38:23. > :38:29.government need to protect and advance women's economic equality.

:38:30. > :38:33.Chapter one of the qualities act 2010 brought forward by this side of

:38:34. > :38:39.the house enshrined public sector equality duties required by public

:38:40. > :38:40.authorities do have due regard to the number of equality

:38:41. > :38:49.considerations when exercising functions. Section 149 of the

:38:50. > :38:53.qualities act, Labour enshrined that any public body must have due regard

:38:54. > :38:59.to the need to eliminate discrimination and advance equality

:39:00. > :39:05.and it includes gender and ethnicity. The case of bragging

:39:06. > :39:10.versus the Secretary of State for work and pay insurance... The

:39:11. > :39:21.principles outlined in the Jesmond were recently summarised by Mr

:39:22. > :39:25.Justice Gilbert. Crucially, they include the following. The relevant

:39:26. > :39:31.duty is upon the Minister or other decision-makers personally. A

:39:32. > :39:35.minister must assess the risk and the extent of any adverse impact and

:39:36. > :39:40.the ways that may be eliminated before the adoption of a proposed

:39:41. > :39:45.policy and not simply as a rearguard action following a concluded

:39:46. > :39:49.decision. The duty of due regard requires public authorities to be

:39:50. > :39:54.properly informed before taking a decision. If the relevant material

:39:55. > :40:01.is not -- available there will be a duty to acquire it. Therefore, very

:40:02. > :40:05.specifically, I ask the Minister today to outline had the most recent

:40:06. > :40:09.Autumn Statement as well as policy announcement since the party came to

:40:10. > :40:15.government come polite with section 149 of the equality act and the

:40:16. > :40:19.requirements laid out by Mr Justice Gilbert. Assumptions and

:40:20. > :40:23.reassurances will not suffice and the public demand to see how the

:40:24. > :40:27.Autumn Statement and government policies comply under relevant

:40:28. > :40:30.sections of the equality act and case law. I would ask the Minister

:40:31. > :40:34.to make this information available to the house through the House of

:40:35. > :40:40.Commons library at the earliest opportunity. We should not have two

:40:41. > :40:45.hold the government's feet to the fire is showing that their policies

:40:46. > :40:53.aren't disproportionately impacting one group and reversing the progress

:40:54. > :40:57.already made on economic equality... But sadly previous words from the

:40:58. > :41:02.party opposite do not feel as with hope. In November 2012, the then

:41:03. > :41:06.Prime Minister spoke at the Confederation of British industry 's

:41:07. > :41:10.annual conference aimed at government departments would no

:41:11. > :41:15.longer be required to carry out equality impact assessment is. He

:41:16. > :41:22.referred to the impact assessment as "Reams of bureaucratic nonsense and

:41:23. > :41:25.tick box stuff". I would like to ask whether the current Prime Minister

:41:26. > :41:33.and Chancellor agree with this? I give way. What does she think about

:41:34. > :41:38.the fact that the gender pay gap is at a record low, virtually

:41:39. > :41:43.eliminated for women under 40 and that we have more women led

:41:44. > :41:50.businesses than ever before? Doesn't she had to acknowledge that process?

:41:51. > :41:55.-- progress? It pains me it is a woman member asking this so shall I

:41:56. > :42:00.ask my constituents to be grateful that it will only take another 60

:42:01. > :42:05.years before they are on parity of pay? If the government is set to

:42:06. > :42:08.continue in its contemptuous attitude on equality impact

:42:09. > :42:14.assessments, with a minister explain how well the due regard has been

:42:15. > :42:20.given to the Autumn Statement? The government knows how to conduct a

:42:21. > :42:26.product -- proper audit. The qualities and human rights

:42:27. > :42:32.commission and the Briege Wright has outlined suggested methodologies. We

:42:33. > :42:37.have to ask why in the light of these methodologies, does the

:42:38. > :42:42.government continued to be evasive on this. We will continue to

:42:43. > :42:46.commission and publish our own analysis at every future budget and

:42:47. > :42:50.spring statement for as long as it takes until the government does

:42:51. > :42:55.their duty. The question has to be, how long the government will

:42:56. > :43:03.continue to stick their hats -- heads in the stand with regard to

:43:04. > :43:09.their policy impact on women and minority background when the impact

:43:10. > :43:15.rises from 86 to 89%? Or maybe we have to reach 100% before the

:43:16. > :43:17.government carries out an audit? The situation is increasingly

:43:18. > :43:22.embarrassing as the government continues to let women down time and

:43:23. > :43:28.time again. The Treasury refuses to send a minister to appear before the

:43:29. > :43:32.women and equality select committee. They have provided insubstantial

:43:33. > :43:34.data and voted down a motion on this side of the Has last year to

:43:35. > :43:46.public... This document provides no overall

:43:47. > :43:51.analysis on the measures announced on women or black and minority or

:43:52. > :43:55.indeed disabled people. A few days before the Autumn Statement, the

:43:56. > :43:58.women and equality is that committee published a report criticising the

:43:59. > :44:04.government for their lack of clarity. On how the 2015 spending

:44:05. > :44:07.review affected black and the minorities, women and disabled

:44:08. > :44:11.people. And how impact assessments had not been undertaken. The chair

:44:12. > :44:14.of the committee, the highly regarded conservative Right

:44:15. > :44:18.Honourable member from Basingstoke said "Without the information we

:44:19. > :44:22.have asked for, all ministerial evidence, it has not been possible

:44:23. > :44:29.to form a view on the government's work on the public duty quality. It

:44:30. > :44:33.is a central aim of the public sector equality duty requirements.

:44:34. > :44:38.The select committee and numerous organisations and indeed this side

:44:39. > :44:41.of the House have all made clear, that the distribution analysis

:44:42. > :44:45.produced by the government is simply inadequate to be able to judge their

:44:46. > :44:50.compliance with the equalities act. Today, the evasiveness must stop.

:44:51. > :44:52.Women and those with protected characteristics of an done the

:44:53. > :44:57.country deserve and indeed expect better. Various government ministers

:44:58. > :45:01.have refused to accept the analysis produced by the House of Commons

:45:02. > :45:05.library, quoted in the motion today. I would like to ask the Minister, if

:45:06. > :45:08.you disagree with the Independent House of Commons analysis, with the

:45:09. > :45:15.gun being that macro government be willing to produce their own? It is

:45:16. > :45:20.not good enough to criticise the analysis without producing your own.

:45:21. > :45:28.As stated earlier, I will give way. I thank her for giving way. Could

:45:29. > :45:29.she clarify whether the House of Commons analysis includes the

:45:30. > :45:38.national living wage because two thirds of women will benefit from

:45:39. > :45:45.the national living wage policy? The problem with the national living

:45:46. > :45:50.wage is that it is a misnomer. It is a welcomer that it is increased but

:45:51. > :45:53.what we are looking for is a real living wage which actually brings

:45:54. > :46:00.people out of poverty and we are not saying that at the moment. I will

:46:01. > :46:09.give way. The macro I am grateful to her for giving way but if you

:46:10. > :46:12.represent a party whose policy is to preserve the wealth of those who

:46:13. > :46:15.have orally got it but it is inevitable those people are silver

:46:16. > :46:20.bottom of the pile as long as they remain in government. I do agree

:46:21. > :46:24.with that and I am also very proud that I am from a party that wants

:46:25. > :46:29.wealth shared around and for everyone to reach their potential.

:46:30. > :46:35.As stated earlier, I will make some progress. I stated earlier that the

:46:36. > :46:38.government know how to conduct an adequate equalities audit of their

:46:39. > :46:42.financial statements and policies. Clear methodologies have been

:46:43. > :46:45.produced by the equality and human rights commission and they are just

:46:46. > :46:48.choosing not to. Would the Minister today agreed to present to the House

:46:49. > :46:55.how future announcements can be properly taken into account the

:46:56. > :47:00.impact on women, particular those from BME backgrounds. Will the

:47:01. > :47:04.government agreed to put an end to the ducking and diving and send the

:47:05. > :47:07.Minister to the women and equality select committee to answer questions

:47:08. > :47:11.on this matter. Will the government agreed to publish a full impact

:47:12. > :47:16.analysis of their policies since 2010. Will the government outline

:47:17. > :47:19.how this Autumn Statement and future financial policy announcements will

:47:20. > :47:26.demonstrate compliance with the UK's legal and international obligations?

:47:27. > :47:28.I have outlined in my opening remarks gender economic equality has

:47:29. > :47:32.been at the heart of the fight for equal rights in this country.

:47:33. > :47:36.Progress has been all too slow and the victories hard-won. On the side

:47:37. > :47:41.of the House, we can be proud that almost every major piece of

:47:42. > :47:45.legislation that has improved the lives of working women has been

:47:46. > :47:49.introduced by a Labour government. It was a Labour government that

:47:50. > :47:54.introduced legislative protection for women under the equal pay act,

:47:55. > :47:57.the sex and dissemination act and the equalities act. Labour became

:47:58. > :48:01.the first administration since the Second World War to accept state

:48:02. > :48:06.responsibility for developing childcare policy. Introducing

:48:07. > :48:11.paternity leave and maternity leave. Sure start centres, working tax

:48:12. > :48:14.credits and all women short lists. And we have more women MPs than all

:48:15. > :48:19.the other parties in the House combined. But in 2016, under this

:48:20. > :48:24.government, women in the UK are more likely to be working for less pay

:48:25. > :48:29.than men. They are more likely to be in chronically low paid and insecure

:48:30. > :48:32.sectors of the economy and they are disproportionately affected by

:48:33. > :48:35.unprecedented cuts to public services. I'm not going to give away

:48:36. > :48:39.because we have other speakers who want to come in. Unlawful maternity

:48:40. > :48:45.discrimination is becoming an increase under this government's

:48:46. > :48:51.watch. 54,000 pregnant women and mothers forced out of their jobs

:48:52. > :48:53.every years, according to the equality and humans were -- equality

:48:54. > :49:02.and human rights commission for just 1% of those women have taken their

:49:03. > :49:06.case to a tribunal. As I stated at the beginning of my remarks, as of

:49:07. > :49:11.the most recent Autumn Statement, 86% of savings to the Treasury

:49:12. > :49:15.through tax and benefits changes from 2010 will have come from women.

:49:16. > :49:19.Today the government has the chance to decide whether it wants this to

:49:20. > :49:23.be its lasting legacy when it comes to the fight for gender economic

:49:24. > :49:27.equality. He ministers have the choice, does the government stand by

:49:28. > :49:32.and invade its responsibilities and make life worse for women in this

:49:33. > :49:37.country or do they put their warm words into action and rectify their

:49:38. > :49:41.mistake and create a new Iraqi and see and accountability on the impact

:49:42. > :49:46.of government policy on women, disabled and black and ethnic

:49:47. > :49:59.minority people? Minister, we expect you to make the right choice. The

:50:00. > :50:07.question is as on the order paper,. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker, very

:50:08. > :50:10.proud to do it in the name of a female Prime Minister as well. It is

:50:11. > :50:15.the foremost aim of this government that this is a country that works

:50:16. > :50:20.for everyone in our society. Wherever you are from, gender, age,

:50:21. > :50:23.race or background. To deliver that objective, we need a strong and

:50:24. > :50:26.stable economy by boosting productivity, creating jobs and

:50:27. > :50:30.bringing public finances under control. That is how we will be in

:50:31. > :50:35.the best position to create a sustained rise in living standards

:50:36. > :50:38.for all British people. Our entire economic approach has been based on

:50:39. > :50:42.the determination to make people better off now and in the future in

:50:43. > :50:46.all parts of the United Kingdom and the full breadth of society. That is

:50:47. > :50:50.why we reject the assumptions made in today's motion and believe

:50:51. > :50:56.instead that the plans we have set out will deliver a stronger economy

:50:57. > :51:01.that works for everyone. I want to reflect, I will just make little

:51:02. > :51:04.progress and then I will give way. I want to reflect on the measures we

:51:05. > :51:10.have taken to strengthen our economy in this way. People, regardless of

:51:11. > :51:13.their race or gender will benefit from our work to restore the economy

:51:14. > :51:18.to long-term health. That starts with bringing public finances under

:51:19. > :51:26.control. With UK debt soon reaching a 50 year high of 90.2% of GDP, we

:51:27. > :51:29.must assume a credible fiscal path to get it falling. In the last six

:51:30. > :51:35.is, we have cut the deficit by almost two thirds to four percent of

:51:36. > :51:42.our GDP. We confirmed in the recent Autumn Statement that we will do

:51:43. > :51:47.live a surplus as soon as is in the interim bringing in 2% of the end of

:51:48. > :51:54.the parliament and getting public services net debt falling in this

:51:55. > :51:57.armament as well. People across our society also benefit from our

:51:58. > :52:00.business led recovery that has been at the heart of our economic

:52:01. > :52:04.approach. We have been making sure that Britain is open for business

:52:05. > :52:09.from our competitive tax regime to cutting over ?10 billion worth of

:52:10. > :52:13.red tape and are at stencil investment in infrastructure, skills

:52:14. > :52:20.and research. The Autumn Statement took this further with a host of

:52:21. > :52:24.measures, including the new national productivity investment fund of ?23

:52:25. > :52:29.million over the next five years. It is a result of measures like these

:52:30. > :52:34.that we are seeing over 1 million new businesses started since 2010 by

:52:35. > :52:38.taking us up to a record 5.5 million small businesses at the start of the

:52:39. > :52:44.year. And by the way, I am pleased to say that around 1.2 million SMEs

:52:45. > :52:50.in the KR majority women lead, this is more than ever before and they

:52:51. > :52:56.contribute ?115 billion to the economy in total. I will give way. I

:52:57. > :53:00.thank the Minister for giving way. In regards to the infrastructure

:53:01. > :53:03.spending which he heralds as being part of the recovery, can I ask how

:53:04. > :53:10.we are the jobs created by that will go to women? I can't say exactly how

:53:11. > :53:13.many will be women or men but Ishii objecting to the infrastructure

:53:14. > :53:19.spending because she believes it won't go to women? I will happily

:53:20. > :53:23.give way again. And yellow macro I will be making a more substantive

:53:24. > :53:27.speech about this shortly that currently in the construction

:53:28. > :53:31.industry, 1% of jobs goes to women. 1%. I ask him again, what percentage

:53:32. > :53:37.does he think of the jobs on infrastructure spending will be

:53:38. > :53:41.spent on women. Can I just point out to the honourable member that there

:53:42. > :53:47.are more women now doing stem available subjects than ever before.

:53:48. > :53:52.Which is about ensuring more people go into that. I am trying to

:53:53. > :53:55.understand the point she is making. Is she saying we should not be

:53:56. > :53:57.spending money on infrastructure because it will have a

:53:58. > :54:03.disproportionate effect favouring men? The purpose by the way of

:54:04. > :54:07.infrastructure spending is to improve our infrastructure and to

:54:08. > :54:11.improve productivity. That is why we are doing that. Productivity that

:54:12. > :54:15.House men and women. I will give way again. I am absolutely not saying we

:54:16. > :54:19.shouldn't spend money on infrastructure, what I am saying is,

:54:20. > :54:22.what is the government going to do to make sure that all of the

:54:23. > :54:31.infrastructure spending out of the Autumn Statement is equally shared

:54:32. > :54:34.between men and women's jobs. I welcome back to the question but I

:54:35. > :54:39.will give way to right honourable friend. You lie my honourable friend

:54:40. > :54:42.will surely be aware that Alan Griffith construction based in my

:54:43. > :54:45.own constituency which build motorways as received a

:54:46. > :54:48.Parliamentary award for its commitment to championing women in

:54:49. > :54:53.the construction industry. Perhaps I've could suggest we should make

:54:54. > :54:59.sure that companies like that are considered carefully. There is an

:55:00. > :55:04.important point on how we encourage more women to become involved in

:55:05. > :55:09.engineering and construction. It is the case that there are more

:55:10. > :55:16.employers taking more steps to do that. I think Ross Royle is another

:55:17. > :55:23.example where that is happening. -- Crossrail. The point she is making

:55:24. > :55:30.is that she seems to object to infrastructure spending which seems

:55:31. > :55:38.a strange position. The global entrepreneurship... And develop mid

:55:39. > :55:42.index has also ranked Britain. Order. I can hear the honourable

:55:43. > :55:47.lady and she should not be speaking so loudly, especially when I am

:55:48. > :55:54.speaking, when she is sitting down. She will have an opportunity to

:55:55. > :56:00.speak soon. Minister. Sylla macro thank you Madam Deputy Speaker.

:56:01. > :56:04.Britain has been ranked as the best place in Europe for female

:56:05. > :56:10.entrepreneurs, something this House will welcome and want us to build

:56:11. > :56:13.further on. Our start-up loans programme helping entrepreneurs set

:56:14. > :56:19.up a business or become self-employed, not only through a

:56:20. > :56:26.loan but access. This programme issues a high proportion of loans to

:56:27. > :56:32.BME applicants, ra presenting 24% of start-up loan recipients with almost

:56:33. > :56:36.10,000 loans issued to BME recipients so far. Support

:56:37. > :56:38.businesses goes hand-in-hand with the high employment rate that we

:56:39. > :56:45.currently have in the UK with today's numbers confirming that the

:56:46. > :56:49.unemployed at rate remains at an 11 year low with employment remaining

:56:50. > :56:54.at near record highs. Will he agree with me that the way this government

:56:55. > :56:58.is really helping women at work is by introducing shared parental

:56:59. > :57:03.leave, flexible working hours and 30 hours free childcare. Those are

:57:04. > :57:09.being pioneered by this government, putting women first in the

:57:10. > :57:13.workplace. Indeed, she raises an important point. I will turn to

:57:14. > :57:19.those measures in a moment or so. It is worth pointing out that as well

:57:20. > :57:23.as impressive employment numbers, this is accompanied by rising living

:57:24. > :57:26.standards which last year grew at their fastest rate in 14 years and

:57:27. > :57:30.currently stands at their highest ever level. The benefits of this

:57:31. > :57:36.affects people across society but this House should note the benefits

:57:37. > :57:40.for women and people from black and minority ethnic groups. The number

:57:41. > :57:44.of women in work has increased by over 1.2 million since 2010. The

:57:45. > :57:48.rate has gone up more in the last parliament than in any of the

:57:49. > :57:55.previous three combined. That comes as the gender pay gap also forced to

:57:56. > :57:58.the lowest on record. More women are on boards or leading businesses than

:57:59. > :58:06.ever before. There are no longer any all-male boards in the FTSE 100. I

:58:07. > :58:11.will give way. On the subject of pay and reference to the excellent

:58:12. > :58:14.intervention by the member for Rochester, the honourable lady

:58:15. > :58:19.talked about national living wage and said it was not adequate, is he

:58:20. > :58:24.aware that the only international comparison of minimum wage is the

:58:25. > :58:25.Economist bitmapped index, the own country with a more generous living

:58:26. > :58:42.wage and this one is Luxembourg. I am grateful to him. The national

:58:43. > :58:47.living wage that was brought in by this government is having an effect

:58:48. > :58:57.and disproportionately benefits women. If you look at the number of

:58:58. > :59:02.black and minority ethnic women in work it is at a near record high

:59:03. > :59:08.with nearly 4000 women finding work since 2010 and the employment rate

:59:09. > :59:16.for people in BME groups is at its highest level since records began in

:59:17. > :59:22.2001. I am very grateful to the Minister

:59:23. > :59:30.for outlining what companies are doing to help women and the black,

:59:31. > :59:34.Asian and Minos -- minorities. But the debate is about what this

:59:35. > :59:43.government is doing and how the austerity is adversely affecting

:59:44. > :59:47.these groups. I think the logic of a point that the honourable member

:59:48. > :59:51.makes is that there is no leak between what happens in the economy

:59:52. > :59:56.and government policies but what has been demonstrated over the last ten

:59:57. > :00:00.years is that there is a clear link between government policy and what

:00:01. > :00:04.happens in the economy and it is because of the policies... We are

:00:05. > :00:09.the fastest-growing economy in the G7 at the moment so it's going quite

:00:10. > :00:15.well given we were the economy that was most affected by the crash in

:00:16. > :00:20.2008 amongst the major economies. The reality is that we've put in

:00:21. > :00:24.place and environment where we create jobs, where we're seeing

:00:25. > :00:30.living standards improving and that is happening across the economy for

:00:31. > :00:35.men, women and children. It is right that we continue our work to address

:00:36. > :00:42.long-standing barriers to work for BME people. New support in school

:00:43. > :00:45.and new guidance from job centres and we've set a public target to

:00:46. > :00:53.increase the proportion of apprenticeship starters for people

:00:54. > :01:01.in BME backgrounds to 20% in 2020. We are strengthening our economy by

:01:02. > :01:05.managing our public finances, backing business and creating jobs

:01:06. > :01:10.and we're helping people, regardless of gender or race, make the money go

:01:11. > :01:14.further in their day-to-day lives. That's why we confirmed in the

:01:15. > :01:20.Autumn Statement that we will raise the personal allowance to ?12,500 by

:01:21. > :01:27.the end of parliament and by 2020 we will have increased by over 90% by

:01:28. > :01:35.-- since 2010 and taking millions out of the lowest pay. We've also

:01:36. > :01:44.introduced the national living wage ?7 20 per hour. And we announced

:01:45. > :01:50.that the Autumn Statement we would raise it to ?7 50 in 2017. The

:01:51. > :01:56.national swimming -- living wage also... And the honourable member

:01:57. > :02:00.should know that women account for two thirds of those who will benefit

:02:01. > :02:07.from this with people from BME communities also expected to gain.

:02:08. > :02:15.I understand what he's saying about the national living wage and the

:02:16. > :02:22.increase, but the 40% tax rate... Only 27% of higher rate taxpayers

:02:23. > :02:24.are women said that changes there will disproportionately affect men

:02:25. > :02:30.and not women so what is the government doing about that? When it

:02:31. > :02:35.comes to income tax that is a matter, is got them, that will be a

:02:36. > :02:41.matter for the Scottish Government and I look forward to seeing what it

:02:42. > :02:47.will do on that. From early 2017 we will also introduced tax-free

:02:48. > :02:52.childcare to help working parents with their childcare costs. Parents

:02:53. > :02:58.will be able to receive up to ?2000 child support each year and we're

:02:59. > :03:01.helping around 3 million households to further increase incentives for

:03:02. > :03:06.people to increase the number of hours they work and earn their way

:03:07. > :03:11.out of functional -- financial insecurity and dependency. With our

:03:12. > :03:15.sustained investment in public services, such as our focus on

:03:16. > :03:19.quality schools with the highest ever proportion of children being

:03:20. > :03:25.taught in good or outstanding schools, the pupil premium to

:03:26. > :03:29.support pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds, and an investment of

:03:30. > :03:34.?23 billion in the school estate over the next five years. Our

:03:35. > :03:40.investment in infrastructure will help all, from roads and rails to

:03:41. > :03:43.the homes we live in, and the recent Autumn Statement contributed to

:03:44. > :03:50.tackling a long-standing challenge to deliver more homes with a further

:03:51. > :03:52.?5.3 billion investment in housing, including a ?2.3 billion housing

:03:53. > :04:00.infrastructure fund to deliver it infrastructure to unlock new homes

:04:01. > :04:04.and to deliver 40,000 new affordable homes. So our economic plans are

:04:05. > :04:09.based on delivering an economy that works for everyone and that means an

:04:10. > :04:14.economy that benefits all races and genders. I note the efforts to

:04:15. > :04:20.analyse the effect on measures we've taken on BME groups and our members

:04:21. > :04:24.will be aware of research of the House of Commons library and the

:04:25. > :04:28.Women's Budget Group on which the premise of today's motion is based.

:04:29. > :04:33.But a cautious approach should be made when analysing specific impact.

:04:34. > :04:39.Findings should not be considered without making an honest assessment

:04:40. > :04:44.on the flaws inherent in the methodologies. First, the House of

:04:45. > :04:48.Commons library looks only at taxes and benefits which means it

:04:49. > :04:53.overlooks key part of the broader economic picture including benefits

:04:54. > :05:00.for women and people from BME groups. It also fails to take into

:05:01. > :05:05.account the public services that families values such as support for

:05:06. > :05:10.childcare, spools -- schools exaggerate. Assumptions are made on

:05:11. > :05:17.how income is shared in any household. For example, is not

:05:18. > :05:21.reasonable to assume that the measure to reduce child tax credit

:05:22. > :05:28.to the first two children will affect a overwhelmingly women

:05:29. > :05:32.because women are usually the nominal payee. That is what the

:05:33. > :05:39.House of Commons library did in previous analyses. That assumes that

:05:40. > :05:42.other sources of income, such as earnings, are not shared within a

:05:43. > :05:48.household in response to benefit changes. Their analysis compares to

:05:49. > :05:53.a world where benefits are upgraded between 2010 and 2015 by the retail

:05:54. > :06:02.price in set -- in text but that is a flawed measure of inflation. So

:06:03. > :06:06.there are a range of issues and methods to calculate the impact on

:06:07. > :06:10.the findings should be seen in this light. But it is right that we

:06:11. > :06:15.assess carefully the effects of any new fiscal measures on any group

:06:16. > :06:20.across our society and we carefully consider the implications of all our

:06:21. > :06:25.measures and protect -- protected groups which includes gender, race

:06:26. > :06:29.and disability in line with our principal of a fairer society but

:06:30. > :06:33.our legal responsibilities also under the equality act of 2010. We

:06:34. > :06:42.publish information alongside the Autumn Statement on the impact of

:06:43. > :06:49.tax measures and also the impacts on households on our decisions on tax,

:06:50. > :06:53.welfare and spending. That is on a range of different incomes. Madam

:06:54. > :06:57.Deputy Speaker, our commitment to fairness runs through everything and

:06:58. > :07:02.goes to the heart of our economic approach we've taken since 2010. The

:07:03. > :07:06.Prime Minister could not have been clearer about her good determination

:07:07. > :07:11.to take every action to make this country that works for everyone.

:07:12. > :07:17.That is why we've launched at an audit to look at racial disparity in

:07:18. > :07:18.public services that stretches across government, health,

:07:19. > :07:24.education, employment skills and justice. So this government is fully

:07:25. > :07:29.resolved to make this a country that works for all races and genders.

:07:30. > :07:33.That is exactly what we work to deliver through our work to build a

:07:34. > :07:38.stronger economy and to help people in their day-to-day lives. That is

:07:39. > :07:44.what last month's Autumn Statement continued to support.

:07:45. > :07:49.Before I call the spokesman for the Scottish National party, I should

:07:50. > :07:53.warn the house that a great many people want to speak. There were

:07:54. > :07:57.lots of interventions on the opening speeches and quite rightly so

:07:58. > :08:02.because that is how you have a heated debate. I make no criticism

:08:03. > :08:07.but it means there will have to be a three minute time limit on backbench

:08:08. > :08:17.speeches. That doesn't apply of course to our next week.

:08:18. > :08:21.Thank you. I am pleased to take part in this debate particularly since

:08:22. > :08:27.figures recently indicate that there have been 455 female MPs in the

:08:28. > :08:34.history of this House. The same number of male MPs present in the

:08:35. > :08:39.house today. That is an important point in terms of policies this Has

:08:40. > :08:43.pursues because policies are not always in the interests of women as

:08:44. > :08:52.they have not been well was that represented over the years. The

:08:53. > :08:56.women we have here today make their voices known and those of their

:08:57. > :09:01.constituents. I'm very grateful to the member for Rotherham who spoke

:09:02. > :09:06.passionately on this issue and I support her calls for a gender audit

:09:07. > :09:10.because it would make a massive government -- difference in the way

:09:11. > :09:16.government policies are analysed. I noted that women's income will be

:09:17. > :09:24.hit twice as hard by men in 2020 and they will be ?1000 worse off by

:09:25. > :09:32.2020. We know that women up -- of below average income will end up

:09:33. > :09:36.?1600 worse off under this government. For female lone parents

:09:37. > :09:46.they will be ?4000 per year worse off. That is a significant amount.

:09:47. > :09:50.From 2010 to 2020, 80 6% of cuts to social security will cut -- come

:09:51. > :09:56.from women's incomes and I don't understand how anyone can make up

:09:57. > :10:05.that difference. Kurt -- research comes bleaker when we consider women

:10:06. > :10:11.from BME backgrounds. Madam Deputy Speaker, those on the benches

:10:12. > :10:15.opposite love their sound bites. They had a long-term economic plan

:10:16. > :10:23.for a long time which has been abandoned because it is Ivan

:10:24. > :10:28.long-term -- it is neither long-term nor a plan. This was not an Autumn

:10:29. > :10:34.Statement that works for everyone and I attend -- in tender highlight

:10:35. > :10:38.a few missed opportunities. I come to the debate with some degree of

:10:39. > :10:42.frustration. The statement was an opportunity for the government to

:10:43. > :10:46.make changes and start a new cause with a new female Prime Minister.

:10:47. > :10:59.The example I have spoken about many times is that it is 526 days since

:11:00. > :11:08.the 26th -- 26 team budget what it will bring into force next April. It

:11:09. > :11:14.will come Powell survivors of rape to... This policy has been widely

:11:15. > :11:18.condemned by felt -- faith leaders as well as organisations such as the

:11:19. > :11:23.union -- United Nations committee on the rights of the child. They would

:11:24. > :11:28.do well to reflect on the seriousness of the widespread

:11:29. > :11:32.contamination. The Orthodox Jewish community has done research as well.

:11:33. > :11:39.Their figures suggest this policy would push 200,000 more children

:11:40. > :11:45.into poverty which is a significant figure. There is a trap inherent in

:11:46. > :11:50.this policy where families will not be able to earn enough to get

:11:51. > :11:57.themselves out of the trap. In telling reckon for every ?1 extra

:11:58. > :12:05.family and they will use a 5p. The Prime Minister spoke about helping

:12:06. > :12:13.families in our society -- they will lose 75p. When she was Home

:12:14. > :12:20.Secretary, a call to action to tackle gender issues and genital

:12:21. > :12:26.mutilation but her actions gave me some hope that perhaps it's rape

:12:27. > :12:30.clause was utterly unworkable as well as immoral. Perhaps when the

:12:31. > :12:35.consultation reports back it will finally be tackled because I can't

:12:36. > :12:39.see how it compulsively work. In stead of using the Autumn Statement

:12:40. > :12:47.as a means of ditching this rape clause, the government it out to

:12:48. > :12:54.consultation. I await the government's response. I wonder what

:12:55. > :12:59.the government expects the consultation to come back with. What

:13:00. > :13:05.do they expect vulnerable women to say to a question that seems to ask

:13:06. > :13:13.how do you intend to prove your child was born out of rape? The

:13:14. > :13:17.government 's agenda disproportionately impact on women

:13:18. > :13:23.and there was missed opportunity for some women. There are estimates that

:13:24. > :13:36.there are thousands of women affected by campaigners.

:13:37. > :13:46.Those women are not having that injustice dealt with. My

:13:47. > :13:52.mother-in-law is also a victim. The woman in that age bracket herself,

:13:53. > :13:56.the women she is not open with this policy. The government could have

:13:57. > :14:04.done more in the Autumn Statement to address the issue of my honourable

:14:05. > :14:07.friend, who is not well, and we sent her our best wishes. She has been

:14:08. > :14:13.highlighting in recent weeks, the child maintenance service, a 4%

:14:14. > :14:16.administration fee for the collect and pay service which is only

:14:17. > :14:23.imposed on families who don't share bank details. The implication of

:14:24. > :14:26.this is that women who have fled domestic abuse situations are the

:14:27. > :14:34.ones who are disproportionately impacted by this situation. They are

:14:35. > :14:38.trying to rebuild family life, the Autumn Statement was a chance to

:14:39. > :14:44.correct this unfurnished and I call on ministers opposite to make

:14:45. > :14:51.progress on this significant matter. Half of Glasgow's job centres are

:14:52. > :14:53.too close, and discussion last week, Glasgow elected ribs and Steve said

:14:54. > :14:58.the impact assessment on these plans would only be done after the

:14:59. > :15:02.consultation, after the consultation. Which is completely

:15:03. > :15:08.inadequate. Only three of eight are going to consultation, the others

:15:09. > :15:14.will not be consulted on. The plans were drawn up to see how far one job

:15:15. > :15:19.centre was from another and with buses we might get, some of the

:15:20. > :15:27.buses referred to the given exist because they have been withdrawn.

:15:28. > :15:32.Women have been working and finding it difficult to meet their

:15:33. > :15:36.obligations, dropping off their kids and adding the extra burden of

:15:37. > :15:41.travelling across Glasgow on more than one bus will put them at

:15:42. > :15:46.serious risk of being sanctioned and it is an explicit bull that that

:15:47. > :15:50.would not be taken into account by the consultation is being released.

:15:51. > :15:53.It is almost as if the government is making it so hard for people to

:15:54. > :16:03.claim what they are actually entitled to. Another thing missed

:16:04. > :16:08.out was the under 25 's. They are keen to advance the national living

:16:09. > :16:13.wage but if you are under 25, you are not entitled to the same pay.

:16:14. > :16:18.Your days work is not seen as much of value as if you are over 25. They

:16:19. > :16:23.say it is about experience but it is not. If you will can do your job on

:16:24. > :16:30.your first day at the age of 25, the differential is ?3 45 as to somebody

:16:31. > :16:37.who is 16, starting on the same day in the same job. That is unfair. The

:16:38. > :16:41.national living wage is not an actual living wage, it is a revised

:16:42. > :16:45.minimum wage which is out of touch with the true cost of living in this

:16:46. > :16:51.country. The real living wage set by living wage foundation is being

:16:52. > :16:55.implemented by the Scottish Government and we now have 693

:16:56. > :17:02.companies in Scotland, across a wide range of sectors and sizes of

:17:03. > :17:09.companies that now believe that a fair day 's work deserves a fair day

:17:10. > :17:15.'s pay. The government's pretend living wage will not deliver that.

:17:16. > :17:19.In discriminating against under 25s, the government doesn't acknowledge

:17:20. > :17:25.that they will not get a discount on their rent or their cost of living.

:17:26. > :17:29.Also to compound this, they are not entitled to the same benefits as

:17:30. > :17:43.those who are over 25. It is completely ludicrous. There is also

:17:44. > :17:55.an issue of the camp on tax. -- tampon. The then financial Secretary

:17:56. > :17:57.to the Treasury seem to think it was nigh on impossible to achieve and I

:17:58. > :18:03.am glad they have made progress on this. And I thank the honourable

:18:04. > :18:06.member for Dewsbury and my honourable friend on this side of

:18:07. > :18:11.the House who have campaigned on this issue. Without cross-party

:18:12. > :18:15.support, I don't think we would have got nearly as far as we have with

:18:16. > :18:20.the government. In the Autumn Statement, the announcement on the

:18:21. > :18:24.tampon tax was welcomed, when the minister comes to the dispatch box,

:18:25. > :18:30.can he tell us how groups in Scotland have benefited from this

:18:31. > :18:36.and can he tell us when these changes will lead to the abolition

:18:37. > :18:41.of the tampon tax. Every month goes by, the government is still saying

:18:42. > :18:45.that revenue come in. I want to know when I'm not going to have to pay

:18:46. > :18:53.that any longer. I am conscious that other colleagues wish to speak and I

:18:54. > :18:57.want to conclude with agreeing that the Autumn Statement was a missed

:18:58. > :19:02.opportunity. It was a missed opportunity on pay equality, a

:19:03. > :19:07.missed opportunity for the Waspy women and a missed opportunity for

:19:08. > :19:15.all women, thank you. Gray before I call the next Speaker, I have two

:19:16. > :19:19.announced the result of today's decide division, in relating to

:19:20. > :19:23.financial services and markets, the iMac weres 297 and the nos were 151

:19:24. > :19:42.so the iMac rows have it. -- the ever since the Tory party which did

:19:43. > :19:47.stand for the old landed interest was taken over in the 1800 by a

:19:48. > :19:49.mixture of free traders and Unionists and liberals, this

:19:50. > :19:53.Conservative Party has been absolutely committed to the

:19:54. > :19:56.principle of equality of opportunity. A society where anyone

:19:57. > :20:01.can succeed based on their merit with no regard at all for their race

:20:02. > :20:04.or sexual orientation or their gender. That is absolutely right, a

:20:05. > :20:09.principle which we maintain to this day. As the father of two daughters,

:20:10. > :20:12.I want them to be able to succeed in education and the workplace and in

:20:13. > :20:16.the public space. I am delighted with the progress the government is

:20:17. > :20:21.making so far and that society is making so far. The lowest gender pay

:20:22. > :20:25.gap on record, record numbers of women in employment. If all in and

:20:26. > :20:30.implement announced today, bringing it well below 5% something which

:20:31. > :20:34.both men and women can benefit from and increases in the minimum wage.

:20:35. > :20:38.Yes we have more to do as well but the Autumn Statement was not an

:20:39. > :20:45.opportunity to start spending money from the magical money tree that

:20:46. > :20:47.members think is unlimited. It is an opportunity to maintain the sound

:20:48. > :20:51.financial direction in which we have been going which has led the

:20:52. > :20:55.Guardian to admit that we now have the highest growth rate in the whole

:20:56. > :20:58.of the G-7. It would be disastrous for everyone in this country, men

:20:59. > :21:04.and women, if the government were to go back on that. There are problems

:21:05. > :21:07.out there. The Casey report which came out a week or two ago

:21:08. > :21:13.highlighted some of the many problems we still face in the

:21:14. > :21:18.challenge of getting equality in our society. I am glad the motion

:21:19. > :21:21.mentions the problems faced by black and ethnic minority women which was

:21:22. > :21:26.also referred to in the Casey review. The most worrying statistic

:21:27. > :21:32.in here was that the biggest problems being faced by women who

:21:33. > :21:37.are of Bangladeshi and cultural heritage and that cultural and will

:21:38. > :21:40.adjust attitudes are having an effect here. People popped up to say

:21:41. > :21:44.that it was a disgrace and we shouldn't be worried about drawing

:21:45. > :21:48.attention to this due to fears of being called racist but some of us

:21:49. > :21:51.have been pointing it out in this chamber for many years. I was on the

:21:52. > :21:55.home affairs select committee in 2008 when it had a report into

:21:56. > :22:00.forced marriage, female genital mutilation and so-called honour

:22:01. > :22:03.crimes. That report was horrifying, we had evidence of girls who had

:22:04. > :22:07.been forced to marry rapists and were unable to prevent British

:22:08. > :22:11.authorities to give visas to the rapists because they were unable to

:22:12. > :22:16.speak out in public for fear of what would happen to them at the hands of

:22:17. > :22:20.their own families. We heard about female genital mutilation. We heard

:22:21. > :22:24.that schools were refusing to put up the forced marriage helpline in this

:22:25. > :22:27.country because of concerns it would alienate the local community. We

:22:28. > :22:32.know there are political meetings taking place addressed by members

:22:33. > :22:35.opposite, senior members of the party opposite where men and women

:22:36. > :22:38.are segregated. I pointed out a few weeks ago in this chamber that the

:22:39. > :22:42.Muslim come so for Britain, one of the so-called moderate Muslim groups

:22:43. > :22:47.was linking to a good site which told women that they should not be

:22:48. > :22:51.able to travel more than 48 miles without a male chaperone. I have

:22:52. > :22:56.drawn attention in this to the fact that some girls in schools are

:22:57. > :23:08.expected to wear full dress as part of the uniform. They are worried

:23:09. > :23:11.about the increase of the burqa and the pressure girls are being put

:23:12. > :23:17.under to wear it in some parts of London at the moment. I very much

:23:18. > :23:20.hope Madam Deputy Speaker that people will hope that it is not the

:23:21. > :23:24.Autumn Statement causing a lot of these problems but backward cultural

:23:25. > :23:29.attitudes portrayed by men in certain commute is to the women in

:23:30. > :23:32.those amenities. I am very glad the government announced in the Autumn

:23:33. > :23:35.Statement that the ?3 million tampon tax is going to be used to support

:23:36. > :23:42.women's charities. I would urge them to put it towards charities for

:23:43. > :23:46.campaigns against forced marriage, one law for all who are campaigning

:23:47. > :23:51.against Shara Law and other charities that are reaching out to

:23:52. > :23:58.women in ethnic minorities to bring out the ethnic equality we also

:23:59. > :24:01.want. I rise to speak in this debate because the reality is that this

:24:02. > :24:05.government's so-called long-term economic plan has failed, is failing

:24:06. > :24:10.and continuing to fail women in particular. In the text of the

:24:11. > :24:13.motion before us today, we see that 86% of the net savings from the

:24:14. > :24:17.Treasury come through tax and benefit measures that are coming

:24:18. > :24:21.from women. The Minister questioned that and said it was maybe not the

:24:22. > :24:24.full picture. It is not the full picture because it doesn't take into

:24:25. > :24:27.account the many hours of unpaid caring work that women in our

:24:28. > :24:32.communities do, often plugging the gaps left by cuts to local services,

:24:33. > :24:35.again caused by this government. Some women are paying more than

:24:36. > :24:39.others and it is women in low-paid jobs from the black and minority

:24:40. > :24:41.ethnic communities and women with disabilities that are

:24:42. > :24:46.disproportionately taking the hit from this government. When it comes

:24:47. > :24:53.to social care that is paid for poker, we know that many employers

:24:54. > :24:56.are women and the hourly wage is ?7 ten. That often does not take into

:24:57. > :25:01.account the time taken to travel between employment so it can top as

:25:02. > :25:06.low as 75, well below the national minimum wage of ?6 70. For this

:25:07. > :25:10.Autumn Statement to say nothing on social care, health, the NHS mental

:25:11. > :25:14.health is quite frankly missing the point and not attacking the issue we

:25:15. > :25:18.face as a country. There is nothing in this Autumn Statement for the 2.6

:25:19. > :25:21.million women who have had their lives changed by this government's

:25:22. > :25:26.attitude towards the equalisation of the pension age. These Waspy women

:25:27. > :25:29.have campaigned with dignity but they got nothing from this Autumn

:25:30. > :25:36.Statement. As this government continues to refuse to act for those

:25:37. > :25:39.women. On the tampon tax, I would like to ask the Minister if she

:25:40. > :25:42.could confirm whether the ?3 million announcement in the statement is new

:25:43. > :25:46.funding or the remainder of the allocation from the 2015 fund? I

:25:47. > :25:50.don't know where to begin with the tampon tax because quite frankly,

:25:51. > :25:54.the fact that women have deep pay a tampon tax does not negate the

:25:55. > :25:59.injustice of a tax that is then given to women's charities. Women

:26:00. > :26:03.should not be funding our own refuges and it is a tax we want to

:26:04. > :26:07.abolish, we would like to abolish it we stand with you on that. It does

:26:08. > :26:10.not offer secure funding for refuges which need long-term secure funding

:26:11. > :26:15.and the government need to step up to the mark on that issue. We should

:26:16. > :26:21.not be needing to have this debate because quite frankly, we should

:26:22. > :26:34.have seen this government publish and equality impact statement before

:26:35. > :26:39.the Autumn Statement. To make some concluding remarks, there is nothing

:26:40. > :26:43.in this debate that is new, quite frankly it has been known for years,

:26:44. > :26:46.decades even. That cuts to public services have a disproportionate

:26:47. > :26:50.impact on women because women are more likely to be working in the

:26:51. > :26:53.public sector, more likely to use services provided by the public

:26:54. > :27:04.sector but yet again, they are the women who are picking up that

:27:05. > :27:13.underpaid work therefore they are now being disproportionately impact

:27:14. > :27:16.on the cuts made by this government. Given this fundamental analysis, one

:27:17. > :27:20.can only assume that this government deliberately presented in Autumn

:27:21. > :27:24.Statement that would disproportionately impact women. A

:27:25. > :27:28.future Labour governed would ensure that women would be gender audited

:27:29. > :27:38.to make sure things work truly for all. Not only has austerity Felder

:27:39. > :27:39.country but a political choice was made for ideological reasons rather

:27:40. > :27:56.than any economic necessity. The opposition's motion today is to

:27:57. > :28:01.attack the government agenda on equality and rape. I am saddened but

:28:02. > :28:05.surprise was that it is typical and frankly and unfounded attack. I

:28:06. > :28:13.would like to ask the opposition to change the record. Any to dump the

:28:14. > :28:19.1980s retro socialism and face the facts. The Conservative Party I have

:28:20. > :28:22.been elected to represent as a woman and as an ethnic minority bears no

:28:23. > :28:29.resemblance to the picture they are trying to paint in this motion. In

:28:30. > :28:33.philosophy or in policy. In fact, quite the contrary. I am proud that

:28:34. > :28:36.on this side that our values of fairness, meritocracy and service

:28:37. > :28:51.inform our policies. We say it doesn't matter where you

:28:52. > :28:54.come from. You can rise up by using the ladder the Conservatives

:28:55. > :29:00.provide. Not hand-outs and dependency and the key to that is

:29:01. > :29:03.working because it engenders teamwork, build confidence and

:29:04. > :29:11.creates responsibility. We believe in the individual and not the state.

:29:12. > :29:15.Taxation stifles enterprise, not powers and that's what the Autumn

:29:16. > :29:21.Statement to pick somewhat attract record reflects. Labour's default

:29:22. > :29:30.position of increasing taxation, spending is unsustainable, it is

:29:31. > :29:36.disempowering to women, disabled people and ethnic minorities. If we

:29:37. > :29:39.want to keep and empower women and ethnic minorities and disabled

:29:40. > :29:45.people we need a strong economy and we get that by managing the books

:29:46. > :29:56.and the finances in a prudent way. This Autumn Statement is a real

:29:57. > :30:00.reflection of how we do that. The commitment to raising the tax-free

:30:01. > :30:05.personal allowance to ?12,500, raising the national living wage up

:30:06. > :30:11.to ?7 50 in April, national insurance thresholds for employees

:30:12. > :30:15.and employers will be aligned, rolling at 30 hours of tax-free

:30:16. > :30:22.childcare, introducing shared parental leave and flexible working.

:30:23. > :30:25.Those are all the conditions that empower women and when you get the

:30:26. > :30:31.conditions right you get the results. The results speak for

:30:32. > :30:35.themselves. Granted, there's more to do, but we can see the gender pay

:30:36. > :30:41.gap is at its lowest on record with more led businesses than ever

:30:42. > :30:50.contributing ?80 billion to the economy per year. We see there are

:30:51. > :30:54.no more all-male boards in the FTSE 100 top companies. Britain has been

:30:55. > :31:00.voted the best country in Europe for women to set up a business. This is

:31:01. > :31:04.a government that creates the conditions to help make work pay and

:31:05. > :31:08.strengthen our economy in a strengthening -- sustainable and it

:31:09. > :31:15.prudent way and in doing so we are all empowered. As women, ethnic

:31:16. > :31:19.people, disabled people and people from a disadvantaged background we

:31:20. > :31:24.are all empowered and that's why we'll -- I will vote against this.

:31:25. > :31:27.It doesn't matter what your background is comic you can achieve

:31:28. > :31:32.your potential and that's why I will vote against the opposition motion

:31:33. > :31:40.today. As of 2016's Autumn Statement, 86%

:31:41. > :31:43.of net savings to the Treasury through tax and benefit measures

:31:44. > :31:49.will have come from women. So here I go again, speaking up for the 2.6

:31:50. > :31:55.million women at first the affected by this government's chaotic

:31:56. > :32:01.mismanagement of the pension age increased. Action to address those

:32:02. > :32:06.who've lost out now is necessary to ensure that everyone is treated

:32:07. > :32:12.fairly by increasing the state pension age for women. An estimated

:32:13. > :32:19.500,000 women born in the 1950s are being affected by these changes in

:32:20. > :32:21.state pension. Changes to state and public sector pensions will

:32:22. > :32:28.disproportionately affect women who already make up two thirds of the

:32:29. > :32:32.UK's poorest pensioners. I have nothing new to say because you've

:32:33. > :32:38.heard it all before. It needs no further explanation as we all

:32:39. > :32:45.acknowledged on the side of the house that a gross injustice to the

:32:46. > :32:48.1950s women. The WASPI generation who are currently experiencing this

:32:49. > :32:55.gross injustice. Today we talked about equality. Those women are not

:32:56. > :33:00.having equality. This government has an opportunity to redress that

:33:01. > :33:04.inequality, to do the right thing and make the appropriate

:33:05. > :33:11.transitional payments for the nineteen fifties WASPI women.

:33:12. > :33:17.Thank you. I welcome any support for women. They make up half the

:33:18. > :33:21.population and contribute so much to our economy, but we need to focus on

:33:22. > :33:27.ensuring we have a strong economy because that way we protect women as

:33:28. > :33:32.well as men, disabled people as well as able-bodied people and people of

:33:33. > :33:37.all races. Through that, all of those people will prosper. I'm

:33:38. > :33:42.pleased our growth is second only to the US under this government. It is

:33:43. > :33:48.unfortunate that the bench opposite focuses on the negatives and not the

:33:49. > :33:52.positives and don't seek to raise ambition and aspiration for all

:33:53. > :33:58.society. I would like to highlight for positives in relation to women.

:33:59. > :34:03.Those who are young, those who are on low wages, those who are more

:34:04. > :34:06.skilled and by way of international comparison. In relation to young

:34:07. > :34:12.women, I don't think it's appropriate to talk down your own

:34:13. > :34:18.women. Girls often do better in school than boys. More women than

:34:19. > :34:23.men go to university. I'd like to recognise the benefit this

:34:24. > :34:27.government's policies have had on those women on lower salaries

:34:28. > :34:38.because men as when is women benefit from the national living wage going

:34:39. > :34:43.up to ?9 by 2020. If, as the opposition pay -- say, women are

:34:44. > :34:47.less pagan men, this will disproportionately affect women. Let

:34:48. > :34:55.us not forget the strides made for those who are higher paid. Now we

:34:56. > :35:01.had -- have no all-male FTSE 100 boards. The number of women on these

:35:02. > :35:08.boards has gone up to 26% in 2015 from 13% in 2011. Firstly, it's

:35:09. > :35:13.important to consider how we are doing in comparison to other

:35:14. > :35:20.countries internationally. The World Economic Forum gender gap measures

:35:21. > :35:27.and ranks the level of equality of opportunity between men and women.

:35:28. > :35:32.We are 20th out of 144, ranking above Canada, the US and Australia.

:35:33. > :35:39.The member for Rotherham stated she was proud of successive Labour

:35:40. > :35:44.achievements. She failed to mention that according to a Fabian Society

:35:45. > :35:52.only are women and only 16% are only are women and only 16% are

:35:53. > :35:57.council leaders and only 11% as senior Labour star. I want an

:35:58. > :36:10.economy and a society that works for everyone of every race, any gender

:36:11. > :36:16.and of every religion. Thank you. I will talk about the productivity gap

:36:17. > :36:21.and I will stick to the Autumn Statement because that was the

:36:22. > :36:26.subject on the motion today. The product he -- productivity gap is

:36:27. > :36:31.one of the things we pale -- fail on because we forget half of the

:36:32. > :36:35.population. So talking of the infrastructure spending announced in

:36:36. > :36:40.the Autumn Statement, we all know that that will mainly create jobs

:36:41. > :36:45.that are filled with men. What I am asking for the government is to do

:36:46. > :36:50.something about it. The women and equality select committee enquiry

:36:51. > :36:53.into the gender pay gap at minister pledging their desire to do

:36:54. > :36:59.something about it and enquiry found clear evidence that segmentation of

:37:00. > :37:04.jobs is what exacerbates the gender pay gap. Ministers have sat in front

:37:05. > :37:13.of me who were on the bench earlier and said they wanted to see more

:37:14. > :37:18.women in Stem subjects to -- and talk about how brilliant the UK was

:37:19. > :37:23.doing in that field... I am grateful. Does she recognised the

:37:24. > :37:29.question asked by one of my colleagues yesterday that if the

:37:30. > :37:33.half a million jobs from the industrial strategy were all given

:37:34. > :37:39.to disabled, it still wouldn't close the disability gap let alone the

:37:40. > :37:43.gender gap? I do indeed recognise that and I thank her for the

:37:44. > :37:48.intervention. What we have two recognises we all have so much more

:37:49. > :37:52.to do in this area. In the Autumn Statement the announcement of

:37:53. > :37:54.billions of pounds of extra pounds represents an opportunity for the

:37:55. > :38:04.government to invest in construction and ended -- engineering jogs and

:38:05. > :38:07.tech and innovation. It is an opportunity to achieve other aims,

:38:08. > :38:12.aims they have travelled the world saying they care about. I set about

:38:13. > :38:17.asking ministers how they will make sure this money, taxpayers money,

:38:18. > :38:22.included all those women who paid taxes and would it be spent on our

:38:23. > :38:27.prosperity? I asked the Chancellor if he had targets for women's

:38:28. > :38:36.employment and I wonder if we can guess what he said? He is said and I

:38:37. > :38:45.quote, "The government has no plans to step -- set targets for women's

:38:46. > :38:49.employment". It's clear that are not only women losing out in the Cats,

:38:50. > :38:54.we also make no gains from the government when the government

:38:55. > :38:58.finally decides to spend money. There's a huge amount of research

:38:59. > :39:02.that shows that instead of always reaching for the shovels when

:39:03. > :39:08.spending on infrastructure, we need to see investment in child car and

:39:09. > :39:12.target services and that creates more jobs than any road building and

:39:13. > :39:18.has double the effect on productivity by freeing up adults of

:39:19. > :39:21.working age than the responsibilities they have which

:39:22. > :39:28.stopped them from work. That is mainly done by women. I'm asking for

:39:29. > :39:34.the commissioning of all of that money, all the contracts have a

:39:35. > :39:38.condition in the tendering process that providers have to provide a

:39:39. > :39:42.plan of how they will attract more women into the roles. I would ask

:39:43. > :39:50.the government to set targets and quotas. I know they will not do that

:39:51. > :39:54.in opposition to all the evidence. No contract should be allocated

:39:55. > :39:58.without a workable plan being submitted. I also asked the

:39:59. > :40:02.government monitors how many jobs are created by the National

:40:03. > :40:06.productivity investment funds that we women taxpayers can see what we

:40:07. > :40:10.are getting back for our investment and monitoring this will allow the

:40:11. > :40:18.government to see if they are doing a good job for half the population.

:40:19. > :40:26.Government policy cannot be based on the basis of Triumph over hope and

:40:27. > :40:30.experience. Experience and evidence shows that only 1% of direct

:40:31. > :40:35.construction jobs are held by women and 14% across the entire

:40:36. > :40:40.construction industry including Administration and in that field

:40:41. > :40:44.there is a 16% gender pay gap. So we are investing in a sector where

:40:45. > :40:48.women don't have jobs and when they do get them they can be expected to

:40:49. > :40:54.pay -- get paid considerably less than male colleagues. I want this

:40:55. > :41:01.investment but I just want the benefits to be shared equally. Women

:41:02. > :41:09.get 1% at the moment 199% goes elsewhere. I am not sure out waving

:41:10. > :41:14.as we get called on this side of the House. I am literally standing here

:41:15. > :41:21.waving hoping that the government notices that in productivity there

:41:22. > :41:28.is a female of the species. Thank you. While the motion talks

:41:29. > :41:32.about the Autumn Statement, I think we have to except it isn't just the

:41:33. > :41:38.Autumn Statement because we're talking about the key relative

:41:39. > :41:46.effects over a decade. What we see is that the lowest 10% on income

:41:47. > :41:50.stand to lose 21% of their income by 2020. This will affect people with

:41:51. > :42:02.disability. We have debated in this place, the cuts and the changes to

:42:03. > :42:07.PIP that stop someone with disability getting work and we've

:42:08. > :42:11.heard about the impact on black and ethnic minorities. Changes to tax

:42:12. > :42:16.have definitely helped mend. If you are right at the bottom, sadly you

:42:17. > :42:23.are probably not paying tax 08 change in tax threshold does not

:42:24. > :42:27.help you. 72% of those on 42% tax are men so they benefit. In case the

:42:28. > :42:31.government has forgotten some of the things that have been happening in

:42:32. > :42:35.recent years I will put my spectacles on and read the list.

:42:36. > :42:40.Changes to child benefit and important because it is usually paid

:42:41. > :42:45.to the mother. A cat in childcare support within working tax credits,

:42:46. > :42:50.the baby element of tax credits removed, working tax credits or

:42:51. > :42:57.couples with children increased from working 16 hours to 24 hours.

:42:58. > :43:03.Reduction in housing benefit support and most houses with a single adult

:43:04. > :43:08.women so it hits them. The lone parents on income support, once the

:43:09. > :43:18.child is by they need to move to Job Seekers Allowance and 92% of women.

:43:19. > :43:23.The health and pregnancy act axed. Charges for access to child

:43:24. > :43:26.maintenance services and to employment tribunal 's, also

:43:27. > :43:35.affecting women when they are trying to bring in equality cases. And if

:43:36. > :43:40.it Cats and freezes will hit 89% of the people who are hit by these are

:43:41. > :43:46.households with children and 50% are lone parents. Again, 92% of lone

:43:47. > :43:54.parents are women. We know about cuts in universal credits to cut.

:43:55. > :43:59.They reverse U-turn on tax credits which is simply comes in as

:44:00. > :44:02.universal credit being rolled out. Paid to one person in the household

:44:03. > :44:08.and having come from a family where domestic abuse and manipulation was

:44:09. > :44:12.part of that it's a real danger. The key issue is we've not had a key

:44:13. > :44:18.relative impact assessment on all the changes added together for

:44:19. > :44:28.gender, for effortless at a younger disability.

:44:29. > :44:36.The lone parents, as we learned earlier, stand to lose ?4000, that

:44:37. > :44:42.is eye watering, of their income. Women pensioners, 19% pay gap over

:44:43. > :44:48.their lifetime. That means less savings and a bigger reliance on the

:44:49. > :44:53.state pension. And of course we come to the Waspi issue. What this

:44:54. > :44:56.results in is a health impact, the government talk about NHS

:44:57. > :45:03.sustainability but what we have is that the biggest driver of ill

:45:04. > :45:09.health is actually poverty. We talk around smoking and weight and the

:45:10. > :45:14.things people should do but if you look at the marmot report, the

:45:15. > :45:19.differences poverty. The biggest change that ever came previously for

:45:20. > :45:22.public health was changing the London sewers. What we should be

:45:23. > :45:33.trying to do is eliminate poverty and give children a decent start in

:45:34. > :45:36.life. Order. I would like to thank the honourable member for Rotherham

:45:37. > :45:41.for proposing this the bait and highlighting the issue on this

:45:42. > :45:46.matter. Since 2010, women have been hit three times harder by tax and

:45:47. > :45:49.benefits changes than men. 86% of tax and benefit savings have been

:45:50. > :45:54.taken from women. This is an increase of a further 5% since last

:45:55. > :45:57.year 's Autumn Statement. This will affect female headed households the

:45:58. > :46:03.most. They will see the largest rock and standards from 2010 to 2020

:46:04. > :46:07.under a Conservative led government. The Prime Minister, in her maiden

:46:08. > :46:12.speech on the steps of Downing Street said "If you're a woman, you

:46:13. > :46:16.will earn less than a man. Those quote this is absolutely true. The

:46:17. > :46:21.gender pay gap is an issue that needs to be tackled now. Under the

:46:22. > :46:25.Labour government, we have closed it by a third but now, according to the

:46:26. > :46:30.United Nations, on the current rate of progress, it will take Britain

:46:31. > :46:36.another 70 years to bridge the divide between men's and women's

:46:37. > :46:40.pay. I have highlighted that women are being paid less but they are

:46:41. > :46:44.also paying the price of austerity. The effects of the Autumn Statement

:46:45. > :46:48.according to the women's budget group show that women in work will

:46:49. > :46:57.be an average 1000 pounds a year worse off. Compare to the male

:46:58. > :47:03.counterparts, who will still lose ?555 a year. As has already been

:47:04. > :47:08.highlighted, low earning women will be the most affected of any group.

:47:09. > :47:18.Women who are employed and earn below-average incomes will find

:47:19. > :47:21.themselves ?1678 a year poorer. The effects of the Autumn Statement have

:47:22. > :47:26.also been detrimental to women relying on the welfare system for

:47:27. > :47:32.support. Including the reduction to the benefits cap, cutting tax

:47:33. > :47:35.credits and child support and carers allowance heavily affect single

:47:36. > :47:40.parents. Nine out of ten the single parents are women. And for women in

:47:41. > :47:44.work, the government trumpets the raising of the personal tax

:47:45. > :47:49.allowance as lifting people out of tax. Yet it ignores the 43% of

:47:50. > :47:54.people who do not earn enough to even pay income tax. 66% of whom are

:47:55. > :48:00.women and whom this measure benefit not one bit. Since coming into

:48:01. > :48:03.government in 2010, the Conservatives have stated repeatedly

:48:04. > :48:10.that they have a long-term economic plan. And with a new Chancellor and

:48:11. > :48:16.Prime Minister, in the Autumn Statement, they seem to have changed

:48:17. > :48:20.course. They have now promised to target the just about managing. All

:48:21. > :48:26.I can see is that they are getting themselves into a long-term economic

:48:27. > :48:31.jam. I would ask, who are these people who are just about managing?

:48:32. > :48:35.Are they just about managing needing inheritance tax to be scrapped on

:48:36. > :48:39.homes worth up to ?1 million? Is it helpful to give 21 billion in tax

:48:40. > :48:44.cuts to the richest half of households. Are they just about

:48:45. > :48:49.managing? Is it just about managing to be able to blow ?1000 on design

:48:50. > :48:53.and accessories. Many of my constituents can no longer just

:48:54. > :48:56.about manage, they are in fact not coping at all. Having borne the

:48:57. > :49:02.unfair burden of this government's austerity policy. And if this is a

:49:03. > :49:06.government that once a Britain that works for everyone, it should not be

:49:07. > :49:12.allowing them into the paid less while paying the price for their

:49:13. > :49:15.unequal policies. I would ask, in the spirit of positivity, that the

:49:16. > :49:20.government should begin with addressing the mass inequality that

:49:21. > :49:25.has been dealt to UK women. I would recommend to this House that they

:49:26. > :49:29.start with a gender audit of their own policy and gender analysis of

:49:30. > :49:38.future budgets so we can at least begin to eradicate the imbalance

:49:39. > :49:44.that burdens women here in the UK. Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. Quite a

:49:45. > :49:47.lot has been talked about in relation to some of the percentages

:49:48. > :49:52.and things and some of the stats around. I will throw a few more in

:49:53. > :49:56.but not that many. In the hope that we don't bamboozle everybody too

:49:57. > :50:02.much. The government has been saying that things are getting better for

:50:03. > :50:11.women and that this Autumn Statement must be OK. It glosses over the fact

:50:12. > :50:16.that it was written without considering the impact on the

:50:17. > :50:21.different genders. Afterwards they have tried to fudge a response to

:50:22. > :50:28.the question that inevitably came. It is not good enough for the

:50:29. > :50:33.government to just fudge this issue. Women are starting from a position

:50:34. > :50:38.of an uneven playing field. We are starting from a position where over

:50:39. > :50:44.90% of lone parents are female. The gender pay gap in the UK is still

:50:45. > :50:50.13.9% for full-time employees. Women make up 60% of those who earn below

:50:51. > :50:56.the living wage. The real living wage, not the pretence living wage.

:50:57. > :51:02.Women make up 27% of higher rate taxpayers. We are starting from a

:51:03. > :51:06.position we are disadvantaged. There is a gender pay gap and the

:51:07. > :51:09.government can't say they are not doing anything bad in regards to

:51:10. > :51:13.women. Only to stand up and say they are doing good things for women,

:51:14. > :51:20.institute policies that make the situation better rather than just

:51:21. > :51:23.trying to stand still. We are not starting as I said from an even

:51:24. > :51:28.playing field. The other thing the government should be really

:51:29. > :51:35.criticised for is the fact that they keep standing there and saying that

:51:36. > :51:40.many things are wrong. You can't say the evidence is wrong because you

:51:41. > :51:44.disagree with it. That doesn't make it wrong, it just means you disagree

:51:45. > :51:47.with it. Just like the National living wage, the government cannot

:51:48. > :51:51.call it a national living wage and expect people to be able to live on

:51:52. > :51:57.it just because they have called it that, that is not how these things

:51:58. > :52:03.work. What the government needs to do is to actually make these

:52:04. > :52:10.changes. In November 2013, a website produced a piece of work looking at

:52:11. > :52:14.Labour's work around the gender pay gap and the policy. One of the

:52:15. > :52:19.things the website said was "Women just tend to be in those groups more

:52:20. > :52:25.affected by benefit changes." That is absolutely the case, because of

:52:26. > :52:27.the percentage of women who are lone parents and those managing

:52:28. > :52:31.households on their own and the reduction in the numbers of the

:52:32. > :52:35.benefit being given to people with children. Because of all those

:52:36. > :52:39.changes, women are disproportionately affected by

:52:40. > :52:42.these. We are starting off in a position of less privilege and less

:52:43. > :52:46.opportunity and less advantage in society. The government needs to be

:52:47. > :52:50.doing the opposite of what it is doing. It needs to be making

:52:51. > :52:54.positive interventions. The speech made about the ladder and people

:52:55. > :52:58.being able to climb up the ladder is frankly rubbish. People can't climb

:52:59. > :53:02.up the ladder. It seems now that people of my generation are having

:53:03. > :53:05.more trouble climbing up the ladder than the previous generation. Things

:53:06. > :53:09.are going backwards and getting worse. People from less affluent

:53:10. > :53:13.backgrounds, people who are female, people from black and ethnic

:53:14. > :53:16.minority back-ups, people who are disabled particularly, are

:53:17. > :53:22.struggling even more in the last few years to climb up that ladder than

:53:23. > :53:25.they were 20 or 30 years ago. When there was a possibility of that

:53:26. > :53:31.dream and getting out. The government has talked a lot about

:53:32. > :53:35.the FTSE 100 and the fact that 26% on FTSE 100 boards are women, first

:53:36. > :53:45.art that is nowhere near 50%. The only women heading up FTSE 100

:53:46. > :53:49.companies is just five women. I would like can graduate my

:53:50. > :53:52.honourable friend, the member for Rotherham for securing this debate.

:53:53. > :53:57.I am pleased that in her excellent opening contribution she referred to

:53:58. > :54:02.maternity and paternity leave. I would like to focus in particular on

:54:03. > :54:05.the plight of parents of premature babies who really are a group

:54:06. > :54:10.struggling to manage. It feels to me that the Autumn Statement was a

:54:11. > :54:16.missed opportunity to offer them the better help that they need. While

:54:17. > :54:19.maternity provision in the UK is generally good by international

:54:20. > :54:25.standards, it doesn't work that macro work for parents who are born

:54:26. > :54:29.long before their due date. They can often be on life in Inca baiters

:54:30. > :54:34.weeks or months. The parents are unable to hold them because they are

:54:35. > :54:37.in case in machinery with wires, tubes and bleeping monitors. They

:54:38. > :54:43.are quite literally fighting for their lives. Paid maternity leave

:54:44. > :54:47.lasts for around six months but it is triggered the moment the child is

:54:48. > :54:50.born. There is no flexibility allowed if the baby spends several

:54:51. > :54:56.of those first vital months inside an incubator in a special care unit.

:54:57. > :55:00.That means the child is doubly disadvantaged. First by being born

:55:01. > :55:04.too weak and frail to live without medical support and with illnesses

:55:05. > :55:08.that can often go on for years. At secondary by being denied the full

:55:09. > :55:12.period of time that healthy babies get to physically bond with their

:55:13. > :55:15.parents. Holding, cuddling and breast-feeding are vital to a baby's

:55:16. > :55:22.healthy development but a premature baby never gets the time they spent

:55:23. > :55:24.in an incubator. In are watching their baby struggle to live leaves

:55:25. > :55:30.one in every five mothers of premature babies with mental

:55:31. > :55:33.ill-health. Another issue that the Autumn Statement chose to ignore. On

:55:34. > :55:38.average, the parents of premature babies spent an extra ?2000 on the

:55:39. > :55:43.cost of overnight accommodation, hospital parking and eating in a

:55:44. > :55:47.defensive hospital cafeterias. For many parents, that is simple in

:55:48. > :55:50.money they don't have and it pushes many of them into debt that they

:55:51. > :55:54.struggle to get out of afterwards. It is not just difficult for mums

:55:55. > :55:59.but for dads as well. They still only get ten days paid paternity

:56:00. > :56:03.leave, even if their baby is born months early. At the time where the

:56:04. > :56:08.newborn child is fighting for its life, and the child's mother needs

:56:09. > :56:16.help the most, many dads are sent straight back to work. These parents

:56:17. > :56:21.need an extension of paid maternity and paternity leave that takes into

:56:22. > :56:25.account how premature their baby is. It would be a relatively small

:56:26. > :56:30.upfront cost for the government but it will save or public money in the

:56:31. > :56:33.long-term by keeping parents in work, helping vulnerable babies

:56:34. > :56:37.develop more healthily by having that vital time to bond. Reducing

:56:38. > :56:43.mother 's mental ill-health and reducing the need for a later

:56:44. > :56:48.medical intervention for the child. And the human benefit for those

:56:49. > :56:52.families is way beyond any financial calculation. I took a group of

:56:53. > :56:56.campaigners and mums of premature babies to share their stories with

:56:57. > :57:01.the Minister of State for business a couple of weeks ago. I look forward

:57:02. > :57:05.to her views on what she heard. I do hope the government will reflect on

:57:06. > :57:10.the damage they have done for families in these past six years and

:57:11. > :57:13.in this case at least do the right thing and support these parents who

:57:14. > :57:20.need us to do the right thing for them so they can do the right thing

:57:21. > :57:23.for their families. Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to

:57:24. > :57:27.thank the member for Rotherham for championing this issue so very well

:57:28. > :57:31.today. I would also like to thank all of today's fantastic speakers,

:57:32. > :57:34.we have heard from the honourable members for Glasgow Central,

:57:35. > :57:39.Monmouth, Lancaster and Fleetwood, Fareham, Swansea East, South East

:57:40. > :57:43.Cambridgeshire, Yardley, Central Ayrshire, Hayward and Milton,

:57:44. > :57:47.Aberdeen North and Croydon North. And we have heard from them on a

:57:48. > :57:52.range of issues from the gross injustice faced by the Waspi women,

:57:53. > :57:56.the disability work up, the productivity gap, the benefit gap

:57:57. > :58:00.and the universal credit cuts and paternity rights. And ultimately,

:58:01. > :58:05.the fact that austerity and cuts have largely fallen on the shoulders

:58:06. > :58:09.of women in recent years. Last month's Autumn Statement was an

:58:10. > :58:13.opportunity for the new Chancellor to signal a change of direction and

:58:14. > :58:17.repair some of the damage caused by six years of Conservative failure.

:58:18. > :58:25.We were told that our cumulative deficit would be ?122 billion by

:58:26. > :58:26.2021, which is a far cry from the eradicated deficit we were promised

:58:27. > :58:45.by 2015. We've seen six wasted years of

:58:46. > :58:47.pernicious cuts and schemes aimed at dismantling and market housing our

:58:48. > :58:53.public services so that there are no teetering on the edge of a cliff and

:58:54. > :58:57.six years where the wealthiest enjoyed tax giveaways whilst the

:58:58. > :59:03.most vulnerable saw their incomes savagely cut. How did women fare in

:59:04. > :59:08.all of this? Well, I was quietly optimistic before the statement

:59:09. > :59:11.given that we've got a female Prime Minister and she waxed lyrical in

:59:12. > :59:25.the day 's lyrical preceding the statement that the government would

:59:26. > :59:37.help the so-called Jans. But there was nothing for the so-called Just

:59:38. > :59:45.About Managing and no reversal of some cuts and no mess -- mention of

:59:46. > :59:47.social care nor the NHS. Analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies

:59:48. > :59:56.shows that real wages will not have recovered to their 2008 levels even

:59:57. > :59:58.by 2021. This is unprecedented in modern British history and that's

:59:59. > :00:04.before we start looking at the gender pay gap. It was more

:00:05. > :00:09.noteworthy for what it missed rather than what it achieved but what was

:00:10. > :00:13.most disappointing was the Chancellor's failure to address the

:00:14. > :00:18.disproportionate impact of the past six years on women. He had his

:00:19. > :00:23.chance. I made it clear we would support him should he fully support

:00:24. > :00:26.cuts to universal credit but he chose not to and announced a meagre

:00:27. > :00:29.changed to the tapering which would changed to the tapering which would

:00:30. > :00:36.do little to mitigate the effects of the wider cuts which affect women

:00:37. > :00:41.disproportionately. The House of Commons library modelled these

:00:42. > :00:45.changes in different situations and are lone parent with one child on a

:00:46. > :00:53.national minimum living wage is set to experience a net loss of ?2600

:00:54. > :00:59.even with the reduced taper rate. That's a desperate situation for any

:01:00. > :01:05.family to be in, but further analysis shows that single, female

:01:06. > :01:16.adults make up 88% of total single adults in receipt of child and/ or

:01:17. > :01:20.forward -- working tax credits. Not only was the discrepancy not

:01:21. > :01:26.addressed, the systematic failure to properly fund our public services

:01:27. > :01:33.impact on women also. The social care sector is in crisis. It is on

:01:34. > :01:38.the brink of collapse even, which puts even greater pressures on our

:01:39. > :01:44.already creaking NHS. Yet the Autumn Statement did not provide a single

:01:45. > :01:50.penny. Not only is this situation untenable for all in need of care,

:01:51. > :01:54.the chronic underfunding excessively impacts on women. They are the main

:01:55. > :02:00.recipients of social care services and constitute the majority of paid

:02:01. > :02:05.and unpaid carers. About 80% of all jobs in adult social care are held

:02:06. > :02:10.by women and the majority are not well paid, let's be honest. The

:02:11. > :02:13.government seems to suggest that allowing local authorities to raise

:02:14. > :02:19.council tax will address the situation but we know that such a

:02:20. > :02:26.solution creates severe geographical discrepancies that will go nowhere

:02:27. > :02:29.near lagging begat. In my own constituency, it won't even touch

:02:30. > :02:35.the sides of what we need to fund our social care system. I began my

:02:36. > :02:39.remarks by saying that the Autumn Statement was an opportunity for the

:02:40. > :02:46.new Chancellor to change direction. Sadly, he missed that chance. The

:02:47. > :02:51.Minister has another chance today to correct the gender imbalance the

:02:52. > :02:57.economic policies have created over the last six years. Tonight, in my

:02:58. > :03:01.constituency, women will struggle in some cases to put themselves to bed

:03:02. > :03:05.because they've got no access to social care or they will be the

:03:06. > :03:12.unpaid carers putting their loved ones to bed. Women will stay late at

:03:13. > :03:16.work just to counteract the entrenched gender stereotypes in our

:03:17. > :03:20.dog eat dog working lives and often work longer and harder than their

:03:21. > :03:24.male counterparts for less pay and some others who've been hit by the

:03:25. > :03:30.pernicious cuts we've seen in the last six years will struggle to feed

:03:31. > :03:35.their children and themselves. All of these memory and will dream of a

:03:36. > :03:39.future for their daughters, a future that takes them away from the

:03:40. > :03:44.desperation and shattered ambition that has seeped into society over

:03:45. > :03:49.the last six years. The government talks a lot about aspiration. We've

:03:50. > :03:53.heard some of their words today but they are hollow and the clock has

:03:54. > :03:58.been turned back on gender equality over the last six wasted years. An

:03:59. > :04:05.economic plan that has failed Britain and it has failed women.

:04:06. > :04:14.Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. We've certainly had a

:04:15. > :04:19.wide-ranging debate today, a bit curtailed perhaps, but touching many

:04:20. > :04:23.subjects which are fundamentally important to our society and to this

:04:24. > :04:27.government so I would like to thank members on all sides for their

:04:28. > :04:34.contributions. I think we all want to see an economy that works for

:04:35. > :04:39.everyone, women, men, people from black minority ethnic backgrounds.

:04:40. > :04:45.It's right we scrutinise our success in delivering that. Nevertheless,

:04:46. > :04:48.women and minority ethnic groups have historically been

:04:49. > :04:51.disproportionately represented in lower income groups. What we haven't

:04:52. > :04:56.heard today from the opposition is more about broad action to address

:04:57. > :05:01.that long term historical trend and how we address that in the

:05:02. > :05:05.long-term. I thought my honourable friend for Fareham touched on this.

:05:06. > :05:13.We've heard that aspiration is an empty word from the opposition. But

:05:14. > :05:19.it is aspiration that will at -- address the long-term trend and some

:05:20. > :05:22.of the actions we've taken to raise people's aspirations and ensure the

:05:23. > :05:27.next generation does better than the current one in some of those income

:05:28. > :05:31.groups. What are some of the things we've done? Fundamental to

:05:32. > :05:35.everything, and I realise this is something the opposition will never

:05:36. > :05:40.really engage with this, it is a stronger economy and it underpins

:05:41. > :05:45.doing the best for everyone in our society to enjoy a greater level of

:05:46. > :05:51.prosperity and higher living standards. That is the reality.

:05:52. > :05:57.Their failure to engage with this and a mental issue of having a

:05:58. > :06:02.credible plan for our economy and for bringing down debt over time,

:06:03. > :06:07.putting public finances on a sustainable basis, it's that failure

:06:08. > :06:11.to engage with a credible plan on the economy that perhaps explains

:06:12. > :06:16.why only five Labour backbenchers were in this chamber for them

:06:17. > :06:20.beginning of this opposition Day debate and it perhaps explains why

:06:21. > :06:25.Leitch parts of the Labour Party have lost faith in their own front

:06:26. > :06:33.bench -- large parts and is their failure to engage with a fundamental

:06:34. > :06:38.truth of our economy. We've heard nothing about some of these key

:06:39. > :06:43.issues from the Labour opposition. In stark contrast to that, what

:06:44. > :06:50.we've heard from this side of the Has is what we're doing to on the

:06:51. > :06:54.country where someone can grow a business, can succeed we can provide

:06:55. > :06:59.more jobs and opportunities for all working people. There is a start

:07:00. > :07:05.contrast with the Labour record which saw female unemployment rise

:07:06. > :07:11.by a quartered. -- a quarter. We have seen 1.2 million women find

:07:12. > :07:17.work since 2010 and that includes 400,000 women from black and ethnic

:07:18. > :07:23.minority groups. The Has should also note with pleasure that the gender

:07:24. > :07:31.pay gap has fallen to eight new low. All we got was sarcasm from the

:07:32. > :07:35.opposition. Instead of saying, yes, we have made progress. It is all

:07:36. > :07:41.about laying the foundations for rising well for all working people

:07:42. > :07:46.and it means a sensible fiscal plan, it means backing British business to

:07:47. > :07:51.deliver strong growth in our economy and without that we can't create

:07:52. > :07:55.jobs for anyone. I'm slightly mystified at the dismissive tone

:07:56. > :08:02.taken by the Mendip -- member for Birmingham Yardley regarding

:08:03. > :08:13.infrastructure. To dismiss the investment in road-building as being

:08:14. > :08:21.about creating jobs in construction. Mag that bunny in infrastructure is

:08:22. > :08:26.directly intended to help people start businesses and grow businesses

:08:27. > :08:31.quicker. In particular, if you look at the kind of businesses many women

:08:32. > :08:38.have started in this country over the last six years, and I will

:08:39. > :08:42.finish this point and take interventions, if you look at the

:08:43. > :08:48.kind of businesses started by women over the last six years, it's

:08:49. > :08:51.absolutely evident that investment in improving our digital

:08:52. > :08:55.infrastructure is key to some of those businesses because women have

:08:56. > :09:01.been entrepreneurial when it comes to starting new online businesses. I

:09:02. > :09:08.thank the honourable lady forgiving way. In innovation and take it is

:09:09. > :09:12.only 17% of jobs held by women but we can look at that again.

:09:13. > :09:17.Repeatedly words have been put wrongly in my mouth. I have never

:09:18. > :09:23.once said I didn't want infrastructure spending on roads.

:09:24. > :09:27.But that I wanted on care also and I wanted that infrastructure spending

:09:28. > :09:34.to be spent equally on women's jobs and men's jobs. All I'm asking is

:09:35. > :09:39.because the data so we can see if it works. I respond to that point.

:09:40. > :09:44.Investment in infrastructure is about enabling the creation of more

:09:45. > :09:50.jobs and more jobs to grow so we have a point of agreement in that

:09:51. > :09:53.regard, but it's nonsense to say that disproportionately benefits men

:09:54. > :09:58.are not women. We know more women are in employment so things we are

:09:59. > :10:03.doing to enable people to grow businesses and create jobs are

:10:04. > :10:08.directly benefiting workers of all kinds and that is fundamentally what

:10:09. > :10:15.we are about. You've heard from some of my colleagues around the number

:10:16. > :10:20.of women who are going onto boards the number of women in employment,

:10:21. > :10:24.the number of businesses started by women and it is impossible to have

:10:25. > :10:28.this kind of debate if the opposition will not acknowledge any

:10:29. > :10:35.of this. Not acknowledge the fact that when the personal allowance

:10:36. > :10:40.rises to 12,500 next year, 1.3 million people will be taken out of

:10:41. > :10:49.income tax and 59% of whom are women. We've heard from colleagues

:10:50. > :10:54.here about tax free of the credit taper, funding for more info audible

:10:55. > :11:00.homes, more children in good or outstanding schools. But mention of

:11:01. > :11:03.that comes their none and it's as if none of these things have happened.

:11:04. > :11:09.We do consider carefully the applications of all our measures

:11:10. > :11:15.both for protected equality groups and for household that different

:11:16. > :11:18.points of the income distribution. I refer honourable members to the

:11:19. > :11:26.comprehensive analysis we published alongside the Autumn Statement which

:11:27. > :11:32.shows that only the wealthiest households will experience modest

:11:33. > :11:36.losses. That is why in our society today the top 1% of income tax

:11:37. > :11:40.payers pay a greater share of income tax than in any year under the

:11:41. > :11:45.previous Labour government but we don't hear about that either. We

:11:46. > :11:50.want to see women and men of all races, ages in all parts of our

:11:51. > :11:55.country grow increasingly prosperous but the key to doing that is by

:11:56. > :12:00.investing in a strong economy that produces jobs for working people.

:12:01. > :12:03.That's what we'd been working to deliver and that's why today we have

:12:04. > :12:08.more women in work than ever before, while -- more women led businesses

:12:09. > :12:12.than ever before and that's why we've increased support for families

:12:13. > :12:19.and individuals in their day-to-day lives which has said readily been

:12:20. > :12:24.dismissed across the chamber. Or whether by cutting income tax for

:12:25. > :12:28.millions of people. Crucially, women are a much more important part of

:12:29. > :12:31.this country's economy than the opposition give us credit for. We

:12:32. > :12:38.are so much more than they would have it be. I want to make this

:12:39. > :12:44.point that we are here to improve the lot of all working people in

:12:45. > :12:46.this country and, in particular, to support the ever-increasing

:12:47. > :12:51.contribution women make to our economy and long may it be so. This

:12:52. > :12:57.government remains committed to ensuring that this continues into

:12:58. > :12:58.the future. The question is that the original words at stand part of the

:12:59. > :13:13.question. Vote-macro. As many as are of the opinion, say

:13:14. > :13:21."aye". To the contrary, "no". Any of the people opinion say aye.

:13:22. > :21:12.The contrary no. Order. The ayes to the right, 234.

:21:13. > :25:21.The noes to the left, 307. The ayes to the right, 234, the noes

:25:22. > :25:28.to the left, 307. The noes have it, the noes have it. Unlock. The

:25:29. > :25:37.question is that the proposed words be added. As many of that opinion

:25:38. > :25:43.say aye. To the contrary no. The ayes have it. We now come to the

:25:44. > :25:47.second opposition day in the name of the Leader of the Opposition. I

:25:48. > :25:51.informed the house that selected the amendment in the name of the Prime

:25:52. > :25:55.Minister, I now call for John Healey to move.

:25:56. > :26:05.Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. With ten days to go before Christmas a

:26:06. > :26:11.record number of homeless people are sleeping on our streets, in shop

:26:12. > :26:16.doorways and on park benches. More than 100,000 children will spend

:26:17. > :26:22.Christmas Day in temporary accommodation. Children with no

:26:23. > :26:28.home. Young lives scarred by insecurity and impermanence. Mr

:26:29. > :26:34.Deputy Speaker, this shames us all. Homelessness is not inevitable in a

:26:35. > :26:41.country as decent and as well off as ours. And this is a problem we can

:26:42. > :26:47.solve. We know what works because we've done it before. Our last

:26:48. > :26:51.Labour government reduced rough sleeping by three quarters, and cut

:26:52. > :26:59.statutory homelessness to levels which led the independent audit from

:27:00. > :27:03.crisis and the Joseph Rowntree foundation to declare an

:27:04. > :27:07.unprecedented decline. Mr Deputy Speaker I had hoped this debate,

:27:08. > :27:13.called in the face of rapidly rising homelessness on all fronts would be

:27:14. > :27:16.the basis for fresh thinking and a new national will to put an end to

:27:17. > :27:27.the scandal of people sleeping rough on the street for want of anywhere

:27:28. > :27:31.to stay. I still do, but I'm so disappointed the government has

:27:32. > :27:36.rejected our motion which simply sets out the facts. And I say to

:27:37. > :27:42.ministers and members behind them who may support them two-day, you

:27:43. > :27:48.can delete our motion but you can't deny the facts. And the facts speak

:27:49. > :27:52.for themselves. Rough sleeping fell by around three quarters under

:27:53. > :28:01.Labour. It has doubled under the Conservatives since 2010. The number

:28:02. > :28:04.of households accented legally as homeless fell by two thirds under

:28:05. > :28:09.Labour but has risen by nearly half since 2010. And the total number of

:28:10. > :28:15.children in temporary accommodation has risen every year since 2010

:28:16. > :28:22.2/100 thousand in England, and 120,000 across the UK.

:28:23. > :28:30.For the avoidance of doubt the source of these figures is the

:28:31. > :28:35.community's centre -- secretary himself. If he needs to check or his

:28:36. > :28:42.colleagues need to check the tables are number one, number 770 and

:28:43. > :28:53.number 775. Let's look in comparison at the feeble facts and figures in

:28:54. > :28:56.the Government's replacement motion. The Government pleased with the

:28:57. > :29:02.provision of temporary accommodation, when this can mean

:29:03. > :29:07.all families sleeping in one bed, it can mean lights that do not work, no

:29:08. > :29:18.fridge, cooker, no locks on the doors. Government spending more

:29:19. > :29:21.money on homelessness when the 315 million, hundred 50 million, the

:29:22. > :29:25.totals of one full year of parliament simply are dwarfed by the

:29:26. > :29:36.scale of cuts, five buildings housing benefit and the supporting

:29:37. > :29:40.people funding of. -- cut in half. And the Government committed to

:29:41. > :29:44.building more homes when number of affordable homes being built has set

:29:45. > :29:48.the lowest level in 24 years and the number of new social rented homes in

:29:49. > :29:55.this country is at its lowest level since the Second World War. In case

:29:56. > :29:59.ministers have any doubt, table 1000, published by the community

:30:00. > :30:05.secretary himself. Let me warn members opposite, picked with a

:30:06. > :30:12.large pinch of salt whatever their front bench are saying, housing and

:30:13. > :30:15.homelessness. Simply ask, is it working? I give way to Housing

:30:16. > :30:18.Minister. The honourable gentleman says we

:30:19. > :30:22.should take what the front bench seat with a pinch of salt, what does

:30:23. > :30:27.he have to say to Labour Mayor of London says that this Government has

:30:28. > :30:30.just given London a record level of funding for affordable housing?

:30:31. > :30:34.I'd say two things, first of all, a large part of that is underspend

:30:35. > :30:40.from the previous period rolled over, and secondly, the Government

:30:41. > :30:43.is in total boost your spending ?1 billion in building new homes we

:30:44. > :30:46.need in this country, in the last year of the last Labour Government

:30:47. > :30:55.when I was a Housing Minister it was ?3 billion. I said earlier that

:30:56. > :31:02.rapidly rising homelessness shames us all. It does what it should shame

:31:03. > :31:06.Government ministers most of all. -- but it should. The hard truth for

:31:07. > :31:11.Tory ministers as it is their decisions since 2010 but have course

:31:12. > :31:17.this homelessness crisis. Record all levels of affordable rented housing,

:31:18. > :31:21.last year at the lowest since 1991. Lack of action to help private

:31:22. > :31:24.renters while eviction or default from a private tenancy is now the

:31:25. > :31:30.biggest single cause of homelessness. And deep cuts to

:31:31. > :31:35.housing benefit and charity funding and helps the most vulnerable

:31:36. > :31:41.people, including homeless. The motion does mention the

:31:42. > :31:44.honourable member for Harrow East's private members bill, I am

:31:45. > :31:49.disappointed he is not in the chamber, but we do back this

:31:50. > :31:54.cross-party bill. We have set to task for the Government. Two tests,

:31:55. > :32:00.if you like, we all hold ministers to account on. First, fund the costs

:32:01. > :32:05.of the new legal duties in full and, secondly, tackle the causes of the

:32:06. > :32:12.growing homelessness crisis. I do welcome the bill because it

:32:13. > :32:19.draws on similar legislation that the Labour led Government in Wales

:32:20. > :32:23.introduced in 2014. Early days, but it seems successfully to have

:32:24. > :32:26.prevented two thirds of all households assessed at the risk of

:32:27. > :32:34.being homeless actually losing their home. This is what good councils are

:32:35. > :32:38.doing the in and day out across the country, despite the toughest

:32:39. > :32:45.funding cuts and toughest service pressures. Exeter Council have cut

:32:46. > :32:50.the number of rough sleepers against the national trend with a new state

:32:51. > :32:56.audits and the firm approach to Street outreach to make sure people

:32:57. > :32:59.can't opt out or help. Manchester Council, they have got to go

:33:00. > :33:02.charities, faith groups and businesses and universities,

:33:03. > :33:11.residents groups in the partnership to end homelessness. Enfield Council

:33:12. > :33:16.set up the Council owned company to purchase 500 properties over five

:33:17. > :33:24.years to house homeless Enfield residents. And, of course, to act as

:33:25. > :33:28.a model landlord. I will give way. I wonder whether his contacts with

:33:29. > :33:31.any of those councils they have highlighted to him what they think

:33:32. > :33:41.the impact of withdrawing housing benefit from under 21s might be?

:33:42. > :33:49.It is a good question. I have not met or talked with anyone who

:33:50. > :33:55.believes that such deep cuts, sort targeted, so harshly on young people

:33:56. > :33:59.will do anything else but compound the growing crisis of homelessness

:34:00. > :34:04.in this country. It is one of the causes of the spiralling scandal and

:34:05. > :34:10.we see -- that we see in this country and one of the things

:34:11. > :34:14.ministers believe must tackle. -- ministers really must tackle. In the

:34:15. > :34:20.media interviews I have done today before this debate the presenter

:34:21. > :34:25.said she was shocked the other day to see someone almost pitching a

:34:26. > :34:32.tent in the middle of central London. It will not shop might

:34:33. > :34:36.Honourable friends on the site. -- it will not shop. You may remember

:34:37. > :34:40.the mass homelessness of the 1980s and 90s with tent cities in central

:34:41. > :34:46.London but in one of the biggest forgotten successors of the last

:34:47. > :34:52.Labour Government which reduced rough sleeping to record levels. We

:34:53. > :34:56.introduced the National rough sleepers unit, the comprehensive

:34:57. > :34:58.intervention plan, ground-breaking legislation, fresh investment and a

:34:59. > :35:08.target to cut rough sleeping by two thirds, which we hit a year early.

:35:09. > :35:12.The time is now, to do better. And to end the rough sleeping so low one

:35:13. > :35:18.lead sleep on the streets. This is unfinished business for Labour. I

:35:19. > :35:21.have today made a pledge on behalf of the Labour Party we will and

:35:22. > :35:27.rough sleeping with them or first-term back in Government. --

:35:28. > :35:31.and rough sleeping. This is backed by a plan to double the capacity of

:35:32. > :35:38.housing scheme, ring fenced for people with a history of rough

:35:39. > :35:43.sleeping. Moore Street rescue schemes, better health care access,

:35:44. > :35:46.more secure hostel funding is only that but you cannot help the

:35:47. > :35:54.homeless if you do not build the homes. Under our plan 4000

:35:55. > :35:57.additional housing association homes would be earmarked for rough

:35:58. > :36:03.sleepers to help them move out of hostels and rebuild their lives,

:36:04. > :36:07.with Government funding and new social rented homes to replace them.

:36:08. > :36:12.This would be the first part of a new National rough sleeping

:36:13. > :36:16.strategy. It would in fact renew new install the programme started by a

:36:17. > :36:22.Conservative Housing Minister, Sir George Young, 1991. This scheme

:36:23. > :36:27.works across London pop has never been set up in some of the other

:36:28. > :36:33.large cities in this country, cities like Birmingham, Liverpool, Bristol

:36:34. > :36:39.or Leeds. In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker a

:36:40. > :36:42.Prime Minister who promises on the steps of Downing Street the country

:36:43. > :36:48.that works for everyone simply should not tolerate the scandal of

:36:49. > :36:52.today's scandal in -- spiralling homelessness. The Government could

:36:53. > :36:56.do this now. It would have wide support. The National Housing

:36:57. > :37:03.Federation today said about Labour's new plan, it will enable them to

:37:04. > :37:07.boost their offer to the increasing numbers of rough sleepers. The

:37:08. > :37:10.largest homeless charity supplied support for rough sleepers said, we

:37:11. > :37:19.strongly welcome this commitment to ending rough sleeping and the call

:37:20. > :37:25.for rough sleeping strategy. We too would back the Government if it

:37:26. > :37:31.acted on Labour's plan. I say to ministers and members opposite,

:37:32. > :37:34.homelessness can and should be a cross-party commitment. With a new

:37:35. > :37:44.national will to solve what is a growing problem. Let us hope this

:37:45. > :37:48.debate helped start to forge exactly that shared determination.

:37:49. > :38:00.As many I call them to move the movement.

:38:01. > :38:05.The Minister will just be as welcome to move the amendment in the name of

:38:06. > :38:08.the Prime Minister. It gives me great pleasure to move the amendment

:38:09. > :38:12.and the Prime Minister's name. Let me start by saying on these benches

:38:13. > :38:17.we welcome this debate. No one is hiding from the facts. Both

:38:18. > :38:20.statutory homelessness and rough sleeping are rising and it is right

:38:21. > :38:26.we discuss why it is happening and what must be done to put it right. I

:38:27. > :38:29.want to start with a couple of party political points responding to some

:38:30. > :38:32.of the points the shadow Housing Minister made and then move on to

:38:33. > :38:38.talk about the substance of the issue and what must be done. The

:38:39. > :38:42.motion that is before us today gives a slightly rose tinted view of the

:38:43. > :38:47.record of the last Labour Government and I am happy to give credit where

:38:48. > :38:50.it is due some members will bear with me I will happily then take

:38:51. > :38:52.interventions. The motion would have to be believed from the moment the

:38:53. > :38:56.Labour Party was elected homelessness began to fall and

:38:57. > :39:01.continue to fall during the appeared on others but the facts are 1990s

:39:02. > :39:06.there was 104,000 accepted as homeless and that figure rose rights

:39:07. > :39:11.were Labour's first term in Government through through into the

:39:12. > :39:18.second term, peaking at 135,000 in 2003 and then, to their credit, it

:39:19. > :39:24.fell significantly, falling to 41,780 by 2010. It has risen, not

:39:25. > :39:29.insignificant at all -- that is not insignificant and I have to give

:39:30. > :39:33.credit. It has risen since then 256,500, not as much the motion

:39:34. > :39:37.suggests but certainly nowhere near the record peak reached in Labour's

:39:38. > :39:43.second term. There are two other measures we should look at. One is

:39:44. > :39:48.the measure of housing supply and the best measure of that is the net

:39:49. > :39:52.additions to the housing stock each year. I will cover the three points

:39:53. > :40:03.and then take interventions. Over the course of the Labour, in the

:40:04. > :40:12.first year 149,000 140,000, 140 6000, 174 185 platoon into --... And

:40:13. > :40:16.not one you the last Labour Government building up homes and in

:40:17. > :40:18.only three of these years that the bill is more than the current

:40:19. > :40:24.Government is achieving and that was at the height of an unsustainable

:40:25. > :40:28.housing boom that ended up crashing our economy. The third measure by

:40:29. > :40:31.which I would suggest we should assess the housing record of the

:40:32. > :40:36.last Labour Government is on affordability. In 1997 the ratio

:40:37. > :40:44.between median earnings and the median house prices in this country

:40:45. > :40:48.was 3.5 four. By 2010 that have increased to 7.0 one. I am happy to

:40:49. > :40:52.acknowledge any subsequent five years of the coalition government

:40:53. > :40:57.increased further to 7.63 but if you look at all of those three points,

:40:58. > :41:00.while there are some good things the Labour Government did and I have no

:41:01. > :41:06.problem giving credit for those, the record is far less rosy than the

:41:07. > :41:08.motion suggests. He sounds like he is rehearsing to

:41:09. > :41:15.become the Chancellor giving an Autumn Statement or a budget

:41:16. > :41:19.statement. This Government has promised in its

:41:20. > :41:24.manifesto in 2015 to seek 1 million new homes built in this country and

:41:25. > :41:29.it is so far off track that it could take until 2025, five years late, to

:41:30. > :41:34.build the number of homes that are needed. The number of new affordable

:41:35. > :41:39.homes built is the lowest on record. Finally, we're talking about

:41:40. > :41:43.homelessness. It is absolutely the case when Labour came into

:41:44. > :41:48.Government in 1997 we were faced with a rapidly rising trend of

:41:49. > :41:52.homelessness then, just like we are faced with a rapidly rising trend of

:41:53. > :42:00.homelessness now. The difference was that Labour acted, it peaked in 2003

:42:01. > :42:05.other homelessness over that period was cut by two thirds. The question

:42:06. > :42:11.for the Minister is, will the act now, will the Government do anything

:42:12. > :42:14.about this rapidly rising and scandalously spiralling levels

:42:15. > :42:19.homelessness we see today? But is a long intervention but let

:42:20. > :42:24.me deal quickly with each of the points. Firstly, on supply, the

:42:25. > :42:30.Government is behind but not way behind as he suggested. In 2015-16,

:42:31. > :42:36.the first year of the five years in Parliament we delivered an hundred

:42:37. > :42:44.90,000. -- 190,000 and two meet the target we need to get 200,000. The

:42:45. > :42:47.fundamental point I was trying to make it we could do with a little

:42:48. > :42:53.bit less complacency from the opposition front bench. Bear with me

:42:54. > :42:59.for a second. There is no room for complacency on the side of the

:43:00. > :43:03.house. Homelessness... Let me develop the point and then I will

:43:04. > :43:09.give way. Homelessness and rough sleeping are both rising, the right

:43:10. > :43:11.honourable gentlemen quartered the Prime Minister, her speech on the

:43:12. > :43:18.steps of Downing Street but she said the mission is to make this country

:43:19. > :43:22.work for everyone of us and, sorting out our feeling housing market and

:43:23. > :43:25.tackling the moral stain of homelessness is central to that

:43:26. > :43:26.mission and I want to spend the rest of my speech setting out how to

:43:27. > :43:37.propose to do that. Today, as yesterday, I agree with

:43:38. > :43:39.him, Labour did not build enough housing. Those of us on the

:43:40. > :43:44.backbenches pleaded with the government to do so. And I welcome

:43:45. > :43:48.in the amendment from the Conservatives the recognition that

:43:49. > :43:51.supply is absolutely crucial on this issue. Could I tempt the Minister to

:43:52. > :43:56.go further and announced that they will abandon the plan is that

:43:57. > :44:00.they've had to keep jacking up demand by processes such as helped

:44:01. > :44:06.by which simply increases prices and homelessness thereby. Up until his

:44:07. > :44:10.last point I was in complete agreement. He is definitely right to

:44:11. > :44:14.say that the main focus on housing policy should be on supply. And when

:44:15. > :44:17.he sees the White Paper the Secretary of State and I are working

:44:18. > :44:22.on, you will see that is the case. What I would say to him, even if

:44:23. > :44:27.tomorrow we could start building in this country at the level we need to

:44:28. > :44:31.build, we would have to do that for a number of years before we saw an

:44:32. > :44:34.impact on affordability. And to do as he is suggesting in the interim

:44:35. > :44:37.and give up any measures that are trying to help people bridged the

:44:38. > :44:42.gap would be a mistake in my opinion. If honourable members will

:44:43. > :44:47.bear with me, if I could make a bit of progress then I will happily take

:44:48. > :44:51.her intervention. I want to set out now the measures that the government

:44:52. > :44:54.is taking to address this issue. First we want to broaden the safety

:44:55. > :44:59.net and have more focus on prevention rather than cure. Current

:45:00. > :45:02.homelessness legislation gives local authorities responsibility in

:45:03. > :45:07.relation to families, admin people, single people who are vulnerable,

:45:08. > :45:11.other people fall through the gaps. The legislation also encourages

:45:12. > :45:14.councils to intervene at the point of crisis, not upstream when

:45:15. > :45:17.problems are first apparent. I'm not sure if my honourable friend the

:45:18. > :45:21.member for Harrow East is in the chamber but I think we would all say

:45:22. > :45:25.to give him great credit for the legislation he is bringing forward

:45:26. > :45:29.and the government is very proud on what is the 50th anniversary of

:45:30. > :45:34.Cathy come home to support this fundamental and important change to

:45:35. > :45:39.our legislation. I will give way and then come back as I promised. Thank

:45:40. > :45:44.you for giving way. Would he agree with me that on the private members

:45:45. > :45:50.bill, when both sides of the chamber came together to support the member

:45:51. > :45:54.for Harrow's member Bill it was a really positive day and a good sense

:45:55. > :45:58.and indication that both sides can and are coming together to tackle

:45:59. > :46:02.this issue. There is actually much more that unites us on these issues

:46:03. > :46:05.than sometimes would become apparent from our debates and I understand it

:46:06. > :46:12.is the job of the opposition front bench to hold the government to

:46:13. > :46:15.account. Thank you for effing way. Just one rough sleeper is too many

:46:16. > :46:20.and there was one rough sleeper in Ashfield in 2010 when we left

:46:21. > :46:24.office. That has now gone up to eight. When you look at statutory

:46:25. > :46:27.homelessness that has risen from 42 to 93. The record of the Labour

:46:28. > :46:32.government considerably better for those vulnerable people than under

:46:33. > :46:36.his government. Does he accept responsibility, what his answer, why

:46:37. > :46:40.has it happened? I'm the housing minister so of course I accept

:46:41. > :46:43.responsibility. I think I'll speak for the Secretary of State as well,

:46:44. > :46:48.we were appointed to these positions in July and our focus is on solving

:46:49. > :46:51.the housing problems this country faces which I think are deep-seated.

:46:52. > :46:54.The truth is that we have not been building enough homes in this

:46:55. > :46:58.country for 30 or 40 years under governments of both colours, and

:46:59. > :47:03.that is the fundamental driver of the housing problems that we now

:47:04. > :47:06.experience. I thank my honourable friend for giving way. He referred

:47:07. > :47:11.earlier to the homelessness bill that is currently going through this

:47:12. > :47:16.house. I wonder whether he agrees the most important thing is that it

:47:17. > :47:20.mandates councils to provide 56 days of support to homeless individuals

:47:21. > :47:26.for the first time, a really intense programme to ensure that actually

:47:27. > :47:30.instead of no second night sleeping out, there is no first night

:47:31. > :47:32.sleeping out. I think there are two fundamentally important things about

:47:33. > :47:36.the bill my honourable friend has brought forward. One is that it

:47:37. > :47:40.broadens the safety net and ensures single people do not fall through

:47:41. > :47:44.the gap, and the second is it encourages councils to intervene

:47:45. > :47:49.upstream. I will make progress and then take further interventions.

:47:50. > :47:53.I'll come next to my honourable neighbour from Carshalton and

:47:54. > :47:56.Warrington. The second thing the government is doing as the Right

:47:57. > :48:00.Honourable gentleman acknowledges that we are protecting homelessness

:48:01. > :48:04.prevention funding for local authorities, nearly ?390 million in

:48:05. > :48:08.this Parliament. The third thing is that we have increased central

:48:09. > :48:10.government funding for programmes. The Chancellor of the Exchequer

:48:11. > :48:14.announced an extra ?10 million in the Autumn Statement bringing the

:48:15. > :48:18.total to ?150 million over the course of this Parliament. In

:48:19. > :48:22.relation to welfare reform we've increased discretionary housing

:48:23. > :48:26.payments which are so important to ?870 million over this Parliament,

:48:27. > :48:31.that's a 55% increase. I was surprised when I was being briefed

:48:32. > :48:35.to see that 60% of local authorities are not currently spending their

:48:36. > :48:40.full allocation. The fifth area that we are looking at is replacing the

:48:41. > :48:44.way that the government funds local authorities in relation to temporary

:48:45. > :48:47.accommodation which is critical. Replacing what is currently the DWP

:48:48. > :48:53.accommodation management fee with a grant from my department which will

:48:54. > :48:56.more than be an equivalent amount of funding and crucially will introduce

:48:57. > :49:00.a lot greater flexibility. Some honourable members may have received

:49:01. > :49:04.a briefing from the Mayor of London specifically welcoming that change.

:49:05. > :49:07.Since the Secretary of State was appointed we've taken a fresh

:49:08. > :49:11.approach in relation to supported housing, ensuring that the LH a cap

:49:12. > :49:15.won't apply, and we will move to a new model of funding based on

:49:16. > :49:20.current levels but topped up crucially by ring fenced grants. I

:49:21. > :49:25.think we would all acknowledge in our constituencies the fundamental

:49:26. > :49:27.role that supported housing place in relation to some of the most

:49:28. > :49:31.vulnerable people in our community and it is absolutely crucial that we

:49:32. > :49:35.get the detail of this new funding regime right, and I would encourage

:49:36. > :49:39.all honourable members to take part in the consultation because we are

:49:40. > :49:42.determined as a ministerial team to make sure that we get that right.

:49:43. > :49:46.The right honourable gentleman talked about a pledge that he had

:49:47. > :49:50.made today but actually to a degree developed something that the former

:49:51. > :49:55.Chancellor said in the budget 2016 when he announced a ?100 million

:49:56. > :49:58.fund to create 2000 places in low-cost rented accommodation for

:49:59. > :50:02.rough sleepers in hostels and crucially for domestic abuse victims

:50:03. > :50:07.to ensure that we can move people on from short-term accommodation into

:50:08. > :50:14.permanent solutions. I will happily give way. I thank my neighbour for

:50:15. > :50:17.giving way. I appreciate what he's just said in terms of supporting

:50:18. > :50:21.vulnerable people. He'll be aware of what this intervention is about

:50:22. > :50:24.because I made it earlier, on the question of housing benefit for

:50:25. > :50:29.under 21. I don't quite understand how that fits into the government

:50:30. > :50:32.eventually programme in terms of preventing homelessness. Does he

:50:33. > :50:36.recognise the figure put forward by charities that if just 140 extra

:50:37. > :50:40.people are made homeless as a result of this change it will cost more

:50:41. > :50:45.than the government will save. My right honourable friend will be

:50:46. > :50:48.aware because he served with us in coalition for five years that what

:50:49. > :50:54.this government is trying to do is to switch from the high tax, high

:50:55. > :50:58.welfare, low-wage economy that we inherited in 2010 to ensure that

:50:59. > :51:04.people are paid more, that they can keep a great portion of what they

:51:05. > :51:08.earn. I'm still trying, to be fair, to answer the right honourable

:51:09. > :51:11.gentleman's question. What we are looking to do is have a welfare

:51:12. > :51:15.system that is fair, that does provide help and support, that

:51:16. > :51:19.doesn't treat the more generously than equivalent people that are not

:51:20. > :51:23.on welfare can expect. I'll make a bit of progress and then I will

:51:24. > :51:26.happily come to the honourable member. I was working my way through

:51:27. > :51:31.this list of measures the government is taking and next up is trying to

:51:32. > :51:36.deal with the upfront cost of accessing the private rented sector.

:51:37. > :51:39.One of the really shocking things that really underlines the point the

:51:40. > :51:43.honourable member for Wolverhampton South West made is that the main

:51:44. > :51:51.cause of statutory homelessness now is losing a private sector tenancy.

:51:52. > :51:54.That shows how the supply issue is absolutely what is driving the

:51:55. > :51:58.rising statutory homelessness. Rough sleeping is a different matter.

:51:59. > :52:03.Nearly always the acute housing people face when sleeping on our

:52:04. > :52:06.street is a symptom of a wider problem in terms of mental health or

:52:07. > :52:11.drug or alcohol addiction. The briefing I had from my official

:52:12. > :52:15.suggested in London nearly 60% of rough sleepers are not UK nationals,

:52:16. > :52:21.so there are issues in relation to our migration system. But in terms

:52:22. > :52:24.of statutory homelessness, accessed to a private rented sector is key,

:52:25. > :52:27.and that's why the announcement the Chancellor made in the Autumn

:52:28. > :52:30.Statement in ratio to letting agencies which I'm sure the

:52:31. > :52:35.opposition welcome is a really important step. I was going to give

:52:36. > :52:40.way to the honourable lady but she has moved sleep 's. I thank the

:52:41. > :52:44.Minister for giving way. He's a London MP like myself. Does he find

:52:45. > :52:49.increasingly in his surgeries cases of families that are having to be

:52:50. > :52:53.moved to hostels, entire families, cases with no recourse to public

:52:54. > :52:58.funds which is entirely illogical, and also does he not recognise the

:52:59. > :53:03.dismay there will be in Ealing today at the mention of the borough in

:53:04. > :53:07.PMQs today, whether Prime Minister appeared to blame the local

:53:08. > :53:14.authority for ?180 million cut to its budget. We've got 12,000 on our

:53:15. > :53:20.waiting list and it's got very high average cost of buying a home. So

:53:21. > :53:25.can he not recognise why people will be dismayed at what's coming out of

:53:26. > :53:29.this government today? I wasn't at Prime Minister's Questions, I'm

:53:30. > :53:33.embarrassed to say. There was a memorial service for victims of the

:53:34. > :53:38.Croydon champ creche which is why I am dressed in this way, so I can't

:53:39. > :53:42.respond to the point the honourable lady made about PMQs, but I can say

:53:43. > :53:48.as a London MPI see every single week in my surgeries and in the case

:53:49. > :53:50.I deal with the consequences of this long-standing failure of this

:53:51. > :53:55.country for 30 or 40 years to build the homes that we need. It's

:53:56. > :54:00.happened under governments of all kind. Let me just finished making

:54:01. > :54:04.the point. And London is the part of the country where the gap between

:54:05. > :54:08.what we need to build and what we are building is most acute. I'm sure

:54:09. > :54:11.I speak for the Secretary of State when I say that I get up every

:54:12. > :54:16.morning thinking about what we can do to sort out this problem. It is

:54:17. > :54:21.my sole focus and I'm going to come on in a second to address the issue

:54:22. > :54:27.of supply, but I'm happy to give way to another fine south London MP.

:54:28. > :54:32.Thank you Mr Speaker. I find it absolutely remarkable how the

:54:33. > :54:34.Minister is trying to absolve the previous government of any

:54:35. > :54:40.responsibility for the housing crisis that we now face. It's my

:54:41. > :54:45.recollection in 2011 that his government cut the national

:54:46. > :54:49.affordable house-building programme by 63%. Can he set out what the

:54:50. > :54:55.consequences of that were on supply of genuinely affordable homes? If

:54:56. > :55:02.the honourable lady will bear with me I will return at the end of my

:55:03. > :55:05.speech to that central question. What I would say, I can't be any

:55:06. > :55:08.more clear about this, if she thinks that I'm trying to absolve the

:55:09. > :55:12.responsibility of the previous government, that is absolutely not

:55:13. > :55:16.what I'm trying to do. Let me say one more time so that nobody can be

:55:17. > :55:21.in any doubt about it, we have not built enough homes in this country

:55:22. > :55:25.for 30 or 40 years. And all of the governments covering that time share

:55:26. > :55:30.some responsibility. If you want me to make some defences, what I would

:55:31. > :55:33.say in defence of the previous Prime Minister in the previous Chancellor

:55:34. > :55:36.and some of my predecessors as housing minister, is that they

:55:37. > :55:41.inherited a situation after the worst economic crash in generations

:55:42. > :55:44.where the priority had to be to reduce the deficit. I'll come onto

:55:45. > :55:56.affording housing numbers and hopefully my answer will satisfy.

:55:57. > :56:01.I'll give way one more time. He was ignoring me but I'm sure he wasn't.

:56:02. > :56:07.I'd like to commend a positive approach and constructive approach

:56:08. > :56:11.to the debate as the opposition front bench have also taken. He

:56:12. > :56:15.talks about rough sleeping and the need to move away from crisis

:56:16. > :56:18.measures to effective measures. Will he reflect on that about the

:56:19. > :56:23.fragmentation of alcohol and drug rehabilitation services taking place

:56:24. > :56:26.when local authorities have been conditioning those, and how they are