Live Debate: Commons Chamber

Urgent question: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if she will make a statement on the Sentencing Council’s publication of community and custodial sentences guidelines

Question. Home Secretary... Minister for Justice.

15:42

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

To ask the Justice Secretary whether she will make a statement on the Sentencing Council's imposition

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of community and custodial sentencing guidelines. The Sentencing Council, Mr Speaker, is independent of Speaker, is independent of Parliament and government. The council decides on its own priorities and work plan for producing guidelines. The Sentencing Council consulted the previous government on a revised version of government on a revised version of the imposition guideline, which included new guidance on presentence reports. That consultation ran from November 2023 which included new November 2023 which included new guidance on presentence reports. That consultation ran from November 2020 3 February 2044.

The previous government responded to the government responded to the consultation on this guideline, on the 19th of be recorded 24. The former sentencing minister, who is now the shadow Transport Secretary wrote to the Chair of the Sentencing Council, thanking him for the revisions from this guideline. In particular, he thanked the council for fuller guidance about the circumstances around which courts should request a presentence report. The Lord Chancellor, Mr Speaker was clear about her discontent with the guideline, when it was published.

It is our view that should not be differential treatment before the law. The Lord Chancellor of the House will be pleased to hear, met with the Chair of the Sentencing Council last week, the discussion was constructive. It was agreed the Lord Chancellor will set out her position more fully in writing, which the Sentencing Council were then consider, before the guideline is due to come into effect. is due to come into effect.

15:43

Rt Hon Robert Jenrick MP (Newark, Conservative)

- -

Well, Mr Speaker. In just 14 days time, new QTS sentencing rules come time, new QTS sentencing rules come into force. -- New to tear sentencing rules. That effect our justice system with a virus of identity politics, dividing citizens on the basis of a skin colour and religion. Rules that ride roughshod over the rule of law, and destroy confidence in our criminal justices High but the justice secretary seems clueless. In fact, she isn't even here at all. Has the Department conducted an assessment of the additional presentence reports that will be required and the impact on the probation service, given that they already are working above capacity.

Are they considering providing the probation service with additional resources to cope with the extra demand? And do they expect the additional presentence reports to lead to further delays in our courts? I ask these questions, because not only do these new rules violate the most foundational principle of equality before the law, but they also create immense pressure on the Criminal Justice Act system. If the justice secretary wanted to stop two-tiered justice, she would have supported my bill on Friday. She would have used her powers of appointment, to sack the individuals who drafted the rules.

Time is running out. And so was confidence in the Sentencing Council. And frankly, the public are losing confidence in the justice secretary and her ministers as well. I cannot help escape the conclusion that the justice secretary actually supports these two tier sentencing rules. Why? Because she supported a group which called the criminal system institutionally racist. Her representatives walk through the two tier guidance and approved them and she refuses to legislate to block the guidance coming into force or to take any sanction against the members of the Sentencing Council but drafted them.

If there is one thing we know about Labour government, it is that they always end in tears. This time, it is a second-tier justice secretary, pursuing two tier justice, all to suck up to her boss, 'Two-Tier suck up to her boss, 'Two-Tier

15:46

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

There is one thing we do know about Labour governments, they always have to clear up the mess left by conservative governments. That is what the Lord Chancellor is doing at the moment. Gearing up the mess left by the previous government, that clogs up the courts, the overflowing prisons, the overworked probation. The Lord Chancellor met with the council last Thursday, had a constructive discussion. It was agreed she will set out her position fully in writing which that Sentencing Council will then consider before the guideline is due to come into effect.

This is serious government not auditioning for government. The party opposite were not only consulted but they welcomed these guidelines when they were in office. The former Minister for sentencing wrote a letter of welcome to the council setting this out on 19 February 2024. There is a process in place now which needs to be allowed to play out. We will not pre-empt that process.

15:46

Andy Slaughter MP (Hammersmith and Chiswick, Labour)

- -

Chair of the select committee.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Mr Speaker. Sentencing Council, should not need saying, is Council, should not need saying, is a nonpolitical body. The guidelines are carefully drafted and widely are carefully drafted and widely consulted. These guidelines received positive responses from the Justice Select Committee and the previous Select Committee and the previous government. They do not require that government. They do not require that a presentence report be provided. Do not tie the hands of the Minister. Does the Minister agree with me that by dragging the Sentencing Council into the political arena without good cause, shallow Justice Secretary causes problems about the council and himself?

15:47

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

I think he makes a good point about the way in which the shadow justice secretary conducts himself. The important thing is that the Lord Chancellor met with a constructive

**** Possible New Speaker ****

meeting with the chair of the Sentencing Council and there is now a process in place to address this issue. Liberal Democrats Spokesperson.

15:48

Josh Babarinde MP (Eastbourne, Liberal Democrat)

- -

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Liberal Democrats Spokesperson. I would like to think that we all

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I would like to think that we all believe in equality under the law in this house. In sentencing matters and otherwise was it is clear that and otherwise was it is clear that two-tier justice has existed in our country having been governed by two-tier Tories who thought they could get away with illegal Number 10 parties while the rest of us would told to stay at home. Two-tier Tories like the shadow justice secretary who unlawfully approved a development for his donor.

Two-tier Tories who have pummelled our prisons and crashed our courts leaving victims to pay the price. So can the Minister tell us how he will reform sentencing in England and Wales to protect victims and survivors so let down by the Conservatives?

15:49

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

The honourable member is perfectly right to underline the importance of equality before the law. He gives me the opportunity to give a plug to the review of sentencing, the independent review sentencing being conducted by David Gauke with an independent panel will address the issues he has raised.

15:49

Imran Hussain MP (Bradford East, Labour)

- -

Thank you Mr Speaker. Does my honourable friend agree with me that if there is two-tier justice system it is not one that is created by the benches opposite but it is created by them. It is, victims of crime are let down by delays, where working- class committees see justice delayed and denied. And where the reality remains that an ethnic minority defendants are disproportionately sentenced. Does he agree that instead of playing political games, we should focus on delivering real justice, ensuring that every decision made in our courts is based on evidence not on culture wars or headlines of right-wing rags? headlines of right-wing rags?

15:50

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

My honourable friend is right to contrast the approach of soundbites from the shadow justice secretary to the approach of rolling up her sleeves and getting on with the job and sorting out the mess left in our prisons, left in our probation service, left in our courts by the party opposite.

15:50

Rt Hon Sir Edward Leigh MP (Gainsborough, Conservative)

- -

Just to be constructive for a moment, surely no one is suggesting that anybody in Parliament wants to restrict the power of judges and their traditional rights to sentence people. All we are questioning is whether a quango like the Sentencing Council should try and stack the deck against certain groups. In all we are saying is that judges should impose sentences irrespective of people to race, colour, or whatever.

15:50

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

My neighbour, the Father of the House, brings a constructive note I agree exactly what he says. We have an independent judiciary we should let them get on with the job. let them get on with the job.

15:51

Emma Foody MP (Cramlington and Killingworth, Labour )

- -

Is a former magistrate myself, I have personally been involved in sentencing decisions and have relied and can attest to the importance of presentencing reports. Giving as much information about an offender as possible before deciding appropriate sentences. Used appropriately this can cut reoffending rates. Does the Minister agree that they should be available for all offenders, and access to these reports should not be determined by an offender's ethnicity, culture, or faith?

15:51

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

My honourable friend is right. Presentencing reports play a very important role and and we ought to applaud the work that the Probation Service and others do preparing these reports. And she is right to point to how effective they are in helping with sentencing.

15:51

Rt Hon Sir Jeremy Wright KC MP (Kenilworth and Southam, Conservative)

- -

Thank you Mr Speaker. The Minister must be right to stress the independence of the Sentencing Council. Would he accept he can't criticise shadow said Tuesday having a few of these draft guidelines when the secretary of state herself has done exactly that. Can I also ask him to consider in this debate the real purpose of a presentence report. It is there to give what information about an offender. But it is also there to enable a judge to impose a non-custodial sentence to impose a non-custodial sentence if they believe that is the appropriate cause.

It is very hard to do that unless someone has been assessed as suitable for a community penalty. Whatever the rights and wrongs of this, isn't it importance now that the Sentencing Council makes clear that what is important in deciding whether to ask for a presentence report is whether that extra information is needed and not anything else including protected characteristics? characteristics?

15:52

Tony Vaughan KC MP (Folkestone and Hythe, Labour)

- -

I think that is exactly what the Lord Chancellor is saying. there is a fatal flaw in the shallow Justice Secretary's case. It is that his party were working for months in order to develop the guidelines about which they now complain. Does he further agreed that rather than desperately storing goals of his party, he should get behind this government's reforms clear up the mess left by his party? mess left by his party?

15:53

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

To be fair to the party opposite they did not work on these guidelines but they were consulted on them and they did respond to them in a positive way.

15:53

Jess Brown-Fuller MP (Chichester, Liberal Democrat)

- -

I note the comments by the chair the Sentencing Council who said that ministers from both Labour and the Conservatives and all the representatives had known about the plans since 2022 did not object. So whilst I'm disappointed that the government is only acting reactively now, does the Minister not agree with me that the shadow Secretary of State has no shame and it is hard to take his faux outrage seriously when it is really just another audition for Tory leader?

15:53

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

I think the honourable lady has said what everybody else in this house and outside the south is thinking.

15:54

Steve Yemm MP (Mansfield, Labour)

- -

Thank you Mr Speaker. I wonder if the Minister will agree with me that the benches opposite have some explaining to do? Given that the Sentencing Council's consultation on the guidelines that recommended differing approaches for those from an ethnic background was undertaken during the previous government time. That the previous government was a statutory consultees and it was backed by the government at the time? time?

15:54

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

He is right. The government of which the members opposite were a member was fully involved in the consultation. Not only were they fully involved but they welcomed it.

15:54

Rt Hon Sir Roger Gale MP (Herne Bay and Sandwich, Conservative)

- -

Coming to this fresh, and without a legal background, it does seem to me a matter of very great importance that ought to be properly debated by this house. Would the Minister agree with me that this is yet another classic example of where the much vaunted separation of powers is likely to interfere with that process?

15:55

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

I think this is the third week in which we have discussed this in this house Mr Speaker. We discussed it at the Lord Chancellor's statement and again at justice Orals last week. again at justice Orals last week.

15:55

I thank the Minister for his statement today. Presentencing reports are important for judges but does he agree that they should be available for all offenders and not determined by ethnicity and culture and faith. I would add to what the men before a sponsor, under the last government we had a two-tier probation system.

15:55

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

I agree with the point my honourable friend is making.

15:55

Richard Tice MP (Boston and Skegness, Reform UK)

- -

Thank you Mr Speaker. Does the Sentencing Council understand that with these guidelines, they are totally out of touch with the mood of the British people. Totally out of touch with the mood of the government, totally out of touch with the mood of this house. And therefore, why are we not agreeing to delay these guidelines until it has been properly debated in this house?

15:56

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

To be fair to the chair the Sentencing Council, he met with the Lord Chancellor last week, it was a constructive meeting. He is awaiting the letter from the Lord Chancellor which he promises Council will consider and respond to before 1 April. April.

15:56

Alistair Strathern MP (Hitchin, Labour)

- -

Is a former local authority leader for justice I saw how important presentencing reports would be in shaping progressive outcomes for justice. It cannot be right that access to them is determined by factors such as race and religion. So can I applaud the Justice team for making sure they have such a strong and robust response to the sentencing Council and what they shall be that unlike the last government, who were clearly asleep at the wheel during the conversation, we remain alert to take whatever action needed?

15:57

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

I agree that the last government appears to have been asleep at the wheel and has only rediscovered their mojo once they have gone into opposition. But I agree with what he says. says.

15:57

Rt Hon Esther McVey MP (Tatton, Conservative)

- -

Thank you Mr Speaker. Last week the Prime Minister announced he was abolishing NHS England to make sure the NHS was brought back under democratic control. Will the Minister be lobbying the Prime Minister to abolish the Sentencing Council, to make sure that sentencing is brought back under democratic control? democratic control?

15:57

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

I thank the former commonsense Minister for question. If she will stop gambling and listen I will attempt to answer. I think she is getting a little bit ahead of herself Mr Speaker. There is a process in place, a constructive meeting with the Sentencing Council. Let's wait for them to respond. Let's wait for them to respond.

15:58

Siân Berry MP (Brighton Pavilion, Green Party)

- -

I don't believe the shadow Secretary of State believes that the law is currently applied equally and free of structural biases. Given the unfortunate politicisation of all of this, doesn't the Secretary of State now back the chair of the Sentencing Council who says that the state should not determined the sentence imposed on an individual offender, but the sentencing guidelines of whatever kind if they were to be influenced by ministers, it would breach an important principle?

15:58

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

Certain things are matters of policy for the government and for Parliament. We have had a constructive meeting with the Sentencing Council. There's a letter going to them, and the Sentencing Council will respond to that. We totally respect the independence of our judiciary.

15:59

Rt Hon Sir Gavin Williamson MP (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge, Conservative)

- -

Just the other week, the Lord Chancellor made it clear that she did not agree with that direction for the Sentencing Council to go in. All of us hope that her meetings with the Sentencing Council will produce results. However, if they don't, will the Minister commit to working cross party because I think there is a real commitment on these benches to work with him, to bring forward emergency legislation if that is required? that is required?

15:59

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

I thank the member for the constructive tone of his question. I am referring to the point that we don't want to get ahead of ourselves. We need to allow the process to go forward. We need to respect the Sentencing Council role in that. And we will address things when we need to address them.

15:59

Mr Joshua Reynolds MP (Maidenhead, Liberal Democrat)

- -

We are now in the bizarre position where the body that advises judges on how to judge may now decide to go to court for a ruling on whether ministers have the power to tell judges what to do or not. What preparation has the department

16:00

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

I'm afraid I am becoming repetitive, Mr Speaker. There is a desire for the members opted to rush ahead, and I have great respect for that. You had 14 years, what did you do for 14 years? Sorry, Mr Speaker, not you. They are trying to rush ahead, Mrs B. And we will take things steadily at the right pace things steadily at the right pace with proper respect.

16:00

Rt Hon Sir Desmond Swayne MP (New Forest West, Conservative)

- -

So, on a point of great importance to the Lord Chancellor, she is reduced to asking the Sentencing Council to change their mind. The former Minister for common sense is right. There is a lesson here for all parliamentarians about the way we delegate powers to quangos who then clearly come up repulsive.

16:01

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

There was a constructive meeting. I think if he had been in the meeting, he would not have seen it as somebody asking. It was a constructive meeting, constructive change of use, proper process in place, what I am confident will, with the right answer.

16:01

Nick Timothy MP (West Suffolk, Conservative)

- -

It is obviously ridiculous that the justice secretary is on her knees before a quango, asking them to respect the principle of equality before the law and this is actually not the only example. The Judicial Committee Act treatment handbook says " To treat some persons equally, we must treat them differently." Will the Minister condemn this logic and say, no, we must not treat defendants differently because of their race or religion.

16:01

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

The government does not believe there should be differential treatment before the law. The book to which he alludes is written by and for the judges and ministers have no involvement whatsoever in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

its content. Does the Minister agree with me and many of my honourable friends

16:02

Mr Peter Bedford MP (Mid Leicestershire, Conservative)

- -

and many of my honourable friends that policy decisions by unelected, non-departmental bodies like the Sentencing Council are eroding public confidence in our democratic institutions? And will he commit to scrapping such bodies so policies always made by ministers are directly accountable to this House?

16:02

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

Policy decisions should be always made by this House. He is right. He is absolutely correct on this. The reality is the background to where we are today is that the Sentencing Council consulted with the government of the day, members of whom are sitting now opposite this. Those members and that government of the day were asleep at the wheel. And now it is down to this government, yet again, to pick up the pieces they have left for us to pick up and sort out their mess.

pick up and sort out their mess.

16:03

Lewis Cocking MP (Broxbourne, Conservative)

- -

My constituents are confused about the justice secretary's position. She says she believes these sentencing guidelines are wrong, in principle. And they amounted differential treatment before the law. But she is in government, Mr Speaker, she has the powers and tools at her disposal to stop this and change it. Why hasn't

**** Possible New Speaker ****

she? I have tried to explain this, so

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have tried to explain this, so I will explain it again once more. The justice secretary, the Lord The justice secretary, the Lord The justice secretary, the Lord Chancellor, has been extremely clear that she believes in equality before the law and she is not happy with these guidelines. That's why she these guidelines. That's why she wrote immediately they were published, unlike the party

16:04

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

published, unlike the party opposite, the hindsight of these earlier consultations. -- That had site. And they didn't just ignore them but responded in a very positive way to them.

16:04

Jim Shannon MP (Strangford, Democratic Unionist Party)

- -

One of this is going to sit down, it is not going to be me, minister, there are things to do and points to follow.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the Minister is an honourable man and I ask a question on behalf of the victims, if he doesn't mind the Minister will understand any form of sentencing must have at its heart sentencing must have at its heart the victims. If the perpetrator is the victims. If the perpetrator is not a concern is, the severity of the crime, the lasting impact on their life is the issue. The many victims today, who will feel the victims today, who will feel the guidelines play politics with justice, what resources will leave victims...

Sorry, recourse the victims will have, whether justice means time served for crimes committed, not based on their ethnicity. Justice is blind and so ethnicity. Justice is blind and so

16:05

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

My honourable friends will not be surprised to know I agree with him, however, I have got the Victims Minister sat next to me and we take the role of victims very seriously, that is why there is a victims representative on the sentencing review panel and whatever comes forward, we need to make sure that victims are centre of what we are doing. I have met with too many victims already in this role and every time I meet with them, it's very difficult. A little bit difficult for me but usually difficult for them, because they are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

living things. It seems like every week we are back here, every week, dealing with culture wars.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Is this a reflection on me? I am beginning to feel it is a reflection

16:06

Bradley Thomas MP (Bromsgrove, Conservative)

- -

beginning to feel it is a reflection on me. It is here because it is appropriate, not because it is here

**** Possible New Speaker ****

every week. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Judging by a lack of action, it does appear the justice secretary is comfortable justice secretary is comfortable with the changes she has described as two tier, coming into effect in two weeks, we have heard the justice two weeks, we have heard the justice secretary is unhappy, if that really is the face, other than cordial and cosy meetings, can the Minister tell

16:06

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

the House and country what the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Secretary of State is doing to prevent two tier justice? The Lord Chancellor has made her position clear, she met immediately with the Sentencing Council, she is writing to the Sentencing Council again to set out her concerns. The Sentencing Council has committed to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

respond to those quickly. Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Minister has told us, he complains

16:06

Minister has told us, he complains The government's position, but why can't he just explain to us, why hasn't the Secretary of State fixed it yet? Because at the moment, it seems they have had a meeting, but hasn't even written a letter in the last three weeks explaining what she actually wants to happen. Which is why, Mr Speaker, thank you very much indeed for having this Urgent Question again today, because the Minister hasn't actually fixed the problem we are all talking about.

16:07

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

The consultation was under the previous government. The previous government not only didn't express concern, they welcomed that what the Sentencing Council was doing, immediately, the Lord Chancellor has seen the guidelines as drafted, she has acted. This is a Lord Chancellor acting to sort out the mess left by

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the party opposite. Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Minister has said the situation is

16:07

Lincoln Jopp MP (Spelthorne, Conservative)

- -

completely clear. So, I feel like a bit of an idiot asking for a bit more clarification, but I will anyway. Presentencing reports are allowed to take in further background on the life of offenders, from ethnic minorities, cultural minorities, and all faith minority communities. What is the definition of a cultural minority? And are our veterans in this country considered a cultural minority or not?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think the honourable member reads out the phrase, which was

16:08

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

reads out the phrase, which was welcomed by the previous government, on which the current Lord Chancellor is objecting to, and talking to the Sentencing Council about.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. On Wednesday, challenged the Prime On Wednesday, challenged the Prime Minister directly on two tier justice and gave him the opportunity to confirm he would back the shadow to confirm he would back the shadow justice secretary's built a stoppers in its tracks. In his attempts to in its tracks. In his attempts to scramble out of giving that commitment, he said something which has been repeated today, that the previous government was consulted and welcome to this guidance.

16:08

Mr Andrew Snowden MP (Fylde, Conservative)

- -

and welcome to this guidance. However, the Sentencing Council themselves have already put in writing that the wording is different, and therefore, materially has a different outcome in what it would have been doing. So, given that the government has failed to take the opportunity the shadow justice secretary presented them to block this, will he confirm the Prime Minister was writing what he said or a Sentencing Council right, because they both can't be.

16:09

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

Selected the previous government wrote to the Sentencing Council during the consultation is clear, they were not just consulted, Mr Speaker, they welcomed the guidance. The initial version of the guidance included reference to specific cohorts of offenders, including ethnic minorities.

16:09

Points of Order

Point of order. House during the course of this Urgent Question that the previous government approved these guidelines in the particular, he besmirched the name of my honourable friend, the former sentencing minister, the member for Orpington. What he said to the House today was wrong, and was said so by the Sentencing Council in their letter to the judge -- Justice secretary herself, in 10 March this year, page 4, paragraph 4, the Sentencing Council made perfectly clear that the guidelines published under his government were materially different than those considered by the prior government.

In fact, his own official was present at the very meeting of the Sentencing Council, of which this version of the guidelines was slide version of the guidelines was slide off. Will he take this opportunity to -- Signed off, will he take this opportunity to set the record opportunity to set the record straight, because he is -- Has misled the House double times today.

16:10

Rt Hon Robert Jenrick MP (Newark, Conservative)

- -

I assume it was inadvertently misled the House? Minister.

16:10

Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)

- -

I do not believe I would vertically misled the House Mr Speaker.

16:11

Ministerial statement: Update on the G7

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We now come to the statement,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Foreign Secretary, David Lammy. With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement on last week's

16:11

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

will make a statement on last week's meeting of G7 foreign ministers. We met, Mr Speaker, at a pivotal moment. Some members of this House may have doubted we could find common ground. Some of our global competitors may have hoped we could fail. But after 36 hours of talks, we were united, Mr Speaker. Britain was united with our allies, to make our citizens more secure. National- security is a foundation of this government's Plan for Change, and we are leading from the front.

Mr Speaker, the overriding priority was of course, Ukraine. Last week, in Jeddah, the United States and Ukraine reached a common position. A ceasefire offer is now on the table. And American weapons and intelligence are flowing once again. This demonstrated what this House has always known to be true. Under President Zelensky's leadership, Ukraine is serious about peace. Sincere in their efforts to pursue a just and lasting end to this appalling war. Unrelenting in their determination to ensure that Ukraine remains democratic, free, strong and prosperous.

At the G7, the UK and our allies were united in our own wavering support for Ukraine's defence of its freedom. United in support for Ukraine's pursuit of peace, united on what is required to make this happen. Now it is Putin who stands in the spotlight. Putin who must answer. Putin who must choose. Are you serious, Mr Putin, about peace? Will you stop the fighting? Or will you drag your feet and play games? Play lip service to a ceasefire, while still pummelling Ukraine.

My warning to Mr Putin is this. If you are serious, prove it, with a full and unconditional ceasefire now. And if Putin does not deliver, Mr Speaker, and I must tell the House that I currently see no sign yet that he is, the G7 meeting helped us ready the tools to get Russia to negotiate seriously. We are not waiting for the Kremlin. If they reject a ceasefire, we have more cards that we can play. We can all see the impact the G7's unprecedented sanctions have had on Russia's faltering economy.

Social spending down. Inflation and interest rates skyhigh. There can be no letup in our efforts. In Canada, we discussed where we can go further, to target their energy and defence sectors. Further squeeze their oil revenues and used frozen Russian assets. At the same time, we will keep up our support to Ukraine. Europeans clearly need to shoulder our share of this responsibility. We in the UK are stepping up. On drones, on munitions, and on training. Sending over 400 different capabilities to Ukraine, and training over 50,000 recruits.

And we have announced the biggest increase in UK defence spending increase in UK defence spending Tomorrow I will be hosting EU high representative, the first such visit since we left the EU. In this moment, Ukraine's friends should be working hand in glove. And that requires a new era in UK EU security cooperation. Finally we are taking steps to ensure Russia does not come back for more. We know the history. Budapest, Minsk, paper promises betrayed by Putin.

Together with France we are establishing a coalition willing to deter Russia from invading again. To be credible, we need US support. But Britain and allies recognise the need to step up. This government should be leading the effort on multiple fronts. In the past week the Prime Minister convened the biggest gathering yet of those who play their part in ensuring Ukraine's future security. This followed my visits to Canada and the Defence Secretary's trip to Paris. And this week military planners from allies will gather for further discussions in the UK co-chaired with France.

Ukraine is our top priority but a unity extended beyond Ukraine. The G7 united in support for the fragile ceasefire in Gaza. The release of all hostages. The unhindered humanitarian aid to Gaza. Let me be clear in this house what I said to the G7. Hamas must release hostages. For Israel to be secure, these terrorists can have no role in Gaza's future. The complete blocking of aid in Gaza is appalling and unacceptable. Humanitarian aid should never be used as a tool.

We urge the Israeli government to change course. The G7 also discussed the Arab reconstruction plan for garter and what we should build on. garter and what we should build on. The G7 united behind political transition in Syria. An condemned the recent violence in the Syrian coastal regions and called for those responsible to be held accountable. And we were united in increasing the pressure on Iran. Tehran is producing highly enriched uranium that makes a mockery of the limit set the JCPOA.

Iran can never be allowed to develop and acquire a nuclear weapons. President Trump has written to the Supreme Leader. This weekend United States has responded strongly to the Houthi resumption of unacceptable attacks on international shipping. Iran must now change course and de-escalate and choose loci. The G7 kept the spotlight on the conflict in Sudan and the DRC. It's denounced the atrocities in Sudan. The war detects civilians, cease hostilities and ensure humanitarian access. There was strong support for the conference next month, an important opportunity to get a political process there.

We condemned the Rwanda act offensive in the eastern DRC. It is a flagrant breach of DRC's territorial integrity. The M23 and random defence force must withdraw. All parties should support processes. The G7 also reiterated our call for the restoration of Venezuelan government, and reaffirm our strong support for Guyana's sovereignty and territorial integrity. As the G7 Mets, Armenia- Azerbaijan war concluded negotiations on the historic peace agreement. We warmly welcome this achievement and encourage both sides to move to signature as soon as possible.

It was a pleasure to be back in Canada, a proud sovereign nation, in which I have family I have visited since childhood. And with whom we share a long history and Royal family. Their new leader, Prime Minister Mark Rutte the is in London today. I'm sure the whole house will congratulate him on his appointment. My fellow G7 ministers and I received a warm welcome to Quebec home of my good friend the Minister. United behind a new Canadian led initiative on maritime.

An example of their strong leadership. With growing threats from the red Sea to the South China Sea, trade routes on which growth and all our economies rely, a strong collective response from the G7 matters to all of us. 50 years ago a small group of Western leaders met just outside Paris, the origins of the G7. They did not agree on everything. They came from different political sides. Three from the left, three from the right. It was a time of upheaval, war in the Middle East, an oil crisis, the recession, and a system falling away.

Many then, as now, pessimistic about the ability of democracies to navigate the turbulence. That generation rose to the challenge. With the Saba Naqvi tried something different. The format allowed us to be honest with each other and find common ground. Today we must rise to these new challenges. In that same spirit of honesty and common purpose, Britain and our partners are stronger when we stand together. We are standing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

together right now. I commend this statement to the house. Shadow Secretary of State.

16:21

Rt Hon Priti Patel MP (Witham, Conservative)

- -

16:27

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

I am very grateful particularly for the cross-party nature of the Secretary of State for the opposition. If I look jetlag I got off the plane at 6 o'clock. But I'm grateful to the honourable lady for the manner of her remarks on Ukraine, there are a number of questions which I will seek to deal with. She is right that Zelensky has made absolutely clear that he is committed to peace. She asked me about the US decision on a military pause in aid and on intelligence.

I'm pleased to say that our assessment is that the pause was for a short period not an extended period and therefore it has not had a material effect. We are pleased to see that resume. We were pleased to see what close from Jeddah, the United States and President Zelensky in Ukraine. After the square with the need for that ceasefire. It is for Putin to unconditionally accept that ceasefire. The ball is in his court. I was pleased to be able to discuss the matters with secretary Rubio in the G7.

But also with the US vice president yesterday. At his residence in Washington. She rightly asks about Russian assets. Let me make clear, Russia must pay for the damage it is causing Ukraine. I'm delighted that the first £752 million payment of the U.K.'s £2.26 billion loan has been generated on Russian sanctioned assets. But she knows that there is rightfully a discussion about moving from freezing to seasoning. It is important that if we were to move in that direction that there is unity amongst the G7 and we will go forward within the EU those countries that are most exposed, and as you would expect, at pace, we are She also asked about UK troops on the ground.

At stake is not only the future of Ukraine, but the collective security of our continent and therefore Britain's direct national interest. So that is why, the Prime Minister has said that Europe needs to step up in the UK is prepared, of course, to consider committing the strips on the ground but there must be a US backstop. There is a further meeting in London this week to continue to get into the operational detail. The Prime Minister and I are pleased alongside the Defence Secretary that outside of the coalition, the willing is growing.

It is right that we consider carefully what would be required on the ground but I note that she will note to that what is very important as the monitoring exercise of what is put in place. And she might have seen the operation that was run by the OSCE in January just before the fighting began in February. That would not be adequate this time around. So, rightly and properly we must get into granular detail of what would be required.

Yes, of course, as the European family but also involving nations like Canada and I had commitment that Canada is willing to step up to be part of that coalition going forward. But there will be others and that coalition of the willing. So, we will look at these issues in detail over the coming days. She, of course, mentions the situation in Gaza and the Middle East. Let me be absolutely clear. We were all united. They can be -- there can be no role for Hamas.

We welcome the work that has been done welcome the work that has been done by the Arab quip on strengthening that proposal, particularly on the security guarantees that the Israelis would rightfully need their assurance that October 7 could never, ever happen again. She also raises the situation in Syria, the awful clashes which led to the death of more than 1000 people. We condemn the violence. At the time, the Minister for the Middle East updated the house.

It is critical that the interim administration in Syria protects all of Syria's minority is. That is why it was heartening to see an agreement last week between the interim administration and the Democratic forces, particularly in north-eastern Syria, and this was obviously a topic of much discussion. She rightly mentioned the strikes in the US. Since 19 November, 2023, the Houthis have targeted international shipping in the Red Sea and attacked the British and American ships. This cannot go unchecked. It is totally unacceptable and must be dealt with.

We don't comment, of course, on other nations military operations but I can confirm that we did not take part in the strikes over the weekend but we are in close touch with our US friends and on the need to act with the Houthis and what they are doing in the Red Sea. She talked about the government's approach to China. What I can assure her is from this government there will not be seven different approaches to China, which is what we experienced under the last government.

Pink punk about over the course of those 14 years and that clarity of the United Kingdom Prime Minister having a beer with the leader of the Chinese Communist party, I guarantee that will not happen under this government -- ping pong. I am the Home Secretary and security issues must be kept in mind as the proper procedures are followed for China's application. She knows as well let we also have our concerns about warrants in China and its proper operation.

16:35

Rt Hon Emily Thornberry MP (Islington South and Finsbury, Labour)

- -

I'm so pleased to see the Foreign Secretary this week continuing to lead our allies in support of Ukraine. Equally pleased to see that he has expressed his support for the issue of moving from freezing to seizing Russian assets. You have 18 billion of them held in the UK. I have to say that if we are serious about doing it, I wonder if we can start getting on with it. The question is the question I have is what is this government doing to allow us to see is those assets won the right time comes? -- sees those the right time comes? -- sees those assets.

-- seize. Has he considered a UN general assembly resolution providing a legal basis for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

coordinated asset seizures? I'm very grateful to the right

16:36

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm very grateful to the right

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm very grateful to the right honourable lady for her question. Of course, her leadership of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee. Can I reassure her that we continue Can I reassure her that we continue to work closely with our allies on this issue. This includes lengthy discussions that we have at the G7. But let me also emphasise, it is important in this particular area that anyway forward is a pulling of that anyway forward is a pulling of that exercise -- pooling.

I don't think it would be right for the UK to act laterally in this instance. Therefore, this is a multilateral endeavour and discussion. She is right that this is a question and we should work on pace at this.

16:37

Calum Miller MP (Bicester and Woodstock, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I also thank the Foreign Secretary. I can come I will focus on you can. Last week, President Zelenskyy announced his acceptance -- willingness to accept a ceasefire. Put in's goals remain the same. Restaurant the country's sovereignty and turning into a satellite state of Russia. The only way to achieve just and lasting peace is by strengthening Ukraine in the face of Britain's brutality -- Putin 's brutality if the US refuses to see is Russian assets.

Can I ask what is stopping him from unlocking the billions of pounds from Chelsea football club that you have already provided humanitarian aid to Ukraine? The Foreign Secretary referred to work that ministers have been doing to support a peace agreement in Ukraine which were party strongly supports. Can I ask him to be more specific question record levels of support have other countries committed and what progress has he made in securing a backstop security guarantee from the United States? Liberal Democrats have warned repeatedly that Donald Trump is back actions are emboldening Putin.

Last month, Donald Trump said that Russia should rejoin the G7 if it be -- if a peace settlement is agreed. This would be utterly wrong. With the UK oppose Russia rejoining the G7 question were given that Donald Trump is not a reliable ally, the UK must lead in Europe to reduce the continentals back reliance on the notices. We support a pan-European rearmament bank so that our defences can be rapidly rebuilt. Last week, we saw proposals for eager structures -- you structures that could leave the you structures that could leave the UK out.

-- EU structures. UK out. -- EU structures.

16:39

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

Well, I'm very grateful to the Honourable gentleman for continuing that cross-party unity. He is usually pretty on top of the details. Can I just say to him on the sovereign assets issue, it is not the United States that has raised consistent concerns about sovereign assets. It's not the United States in this instance. It is actually within Europe. Belgian colleagues that have found themselves more exposed and Germany colleagues that have previously been resistant to this issue but, of course, there is a change of administration in Germany coming so we will see what their assessment is.

On the issue of those funds from Abramovich, of course we want to use them. Can I just say, I should have said this to the honourable lady. We inherited this from the last government. 2.5 years, no progress was made. I am frustrated with that lack of progress and I am doing everything I can in order to reach a everything I can in order to reach a resolution in this matter and I've got to consider all the tools that are available to government.

At this stage, what I want is to be able to act quickly given that he knows and I know and we all know that Ukraine needs those funds now. And therefore, the urge, working with -- we urge colleagues and we urge action now. Can I say to him there was no discussion of Russia joining the G7. No discussion whatsoever. The G7 is a family of democratic nations committed to the rule of law. Russia under Putin has put themselves outside of that club and that necessary partnership.

I see no basis at the moment on which Russia could enter the G7 and indeed there will be other candidates way ahead of Russia were that to be the place. I'm delighted that the Lib Dems have

**** Possible New Speaker ****

a proposal for a rearmament bank. To ensure colleagues are getting

16:42

Dr Rupa Huq MP (Ealing Central and Acton, Labour)

- -

questions, we will have to be short. Of cancers -- if answers continue to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

be long, we will have to intervene. I will come my Honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will come my Honourable friend's strong statement regarding friend's strong statement regarding eight in Gaza. What discussions did he have with G7 colleagues about what can be done about this provocative action during Ramadan and what consequences are therefore

16:42

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and what consequences are therefore what people are saying is a breach of international law? Well, my Honourable friend is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, my Honourable friend is right. This is a breach of international law. Israel quite rightly must defend its own security, but we find the lack of aid. It's now been 15 days since aid got into Gaza. Unacceptable, hugely alarming and very worrying. We would urge Israel to get back to the trucks we saw going in, way beyond trucks we saw going in, way beyond 600, so that Palestinians can get the necessary humanitarian support that they need at this time.

16:43

Rt Hon Mark Pritchard MP (The Wrekin, Conservative)

- -

Can I welcome the Foreign Secretary 's statement today. He Secretary 's statement today. He mentions the oh -- OSCE and well the previous model might not be the right fit for Ukraine, I hope you recognises -- I hope you recognises -- he future models. Iran is the principal source of regional instability and insecurity. In a statement today, it says Iran is producing uranium which makes a producing uranium which makes a mockery of the JCPUA.

Will the UK government support stopping Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon?

16:44

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

And very grateful to the Honourable gentleman for raising this issue of Iran and their desire to have nuclear capability -- I am very grateful. We stand in the way of that and working with the Germans and the French, we are determined to use all diplomatic efforts to bring about a conclusion to that desire, and I discussed that, of course, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio alongside my French and German counterparts at the G7.

We also discussed that nothing is off the table as we discussed those issues with Iran and we are running out of time to reach as a resolution -- to time to reach as a resolution -- to

16:45

Blair McDougall MP (East Renfrewshire, Labour)

- -

Could he add to that with a clear message of peace while the tens of thousands of Ukrainian children have been stolen from the parents and scattered around Russia are not returned? I wonder if he shows my concern that humanitarian research lab at Yale University has been defunded by Elon Musk, while they were tracking hundreds of those abducted children, and will he work with international allies to make sure that that data is not lost and ensure contributes to getting the children back to their anguished families?

16:46

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

Can I congratulate my honourable friend for his question, for the horrors of what the Russian regime horrors of what the Russian regime has done to those children. For the manner in which, he will be pleased and the whole house will be pleased that we have through our ODA budget supported efforts to retrieve and work alongside those children, I was so pleased to spend time with some of those children on my last visit of those children on my last visit to Ukraine with Madame Zelensky but also the previous visit with work that is going on we keep this issue absolutely on our site, it cannot be a negotiating tool in any future discussions that we have with Mr Putin.

16:47

Rt Hon Sir Gavin Williamson MP (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge, Conservative)

- -

If I can draw attention to my register of interests. The Secretary of State for foreign refers rightly set out a broad range of challenges discussed their very well and very detailed. One area he touched on was the thrust of the Houthis and of course then being supported by al- Shabab in Somalia and of course you have the Republic of Somaliland which is the only democratic country in the area that is valiantly trying to fight these terrorist threats.

Will the Secretary of State commit to his department working with the government of the report that might Republic of Somaliland to deal with those threats they are facing but we are also facing?

16:47

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

Can I reassure the honourable gentleman that this was also raised in discussion with G-7 colleagues, he is absolutely right, al-Shabab is a deep, deep concern and the terrorism that emanates from their activities is something that we closely monitor and work with partners on. And yes, of course I can give him that assurance.

16:48

Adam Jogee MP (Newcastle-under-Lyme, Labour)

- -

Happy St Patrick's Day to you and happy but they to my dad he was no doubt watching, he likes to keep an army. -- Happy birthday to my dad. The Secretary of State will know that there are a number of Sudanese British people, I raised the case with him today they were devastated by what they see and what their family members are going through on television and in the media, so I thank him and his team for the support they give me and my constituents.

In advance of the conference to which he has referred, can I urge him to engage the Ayew, the Commonwealth and the Arab league to make sure the political process to which he refers in the state that Mike statement is fit for purpose will stop

16:49

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

Can I wish my honourable friend's father all good wishes as well. On his birthday. And thank him for the way he has continued to raise these issues of conflict in Africa in the chamber. He will be pleased that I met with the African Union at the G 20 a few weeks ago, we will work with them for the conference on April 15, we expect them to attend alongside other African nation, is hugely important that we make some breakthrough, not just on the humanitarian side but on the political side to bring this

16:49

Brendan O'Hara MP (Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber, Scottish National Party)

- -

conflict to an end. conflict to an end. Is clearly under demand and I understand why we haven't seen him since the Prime Minister announced a since the Prime Minister announced a 40% cuts to the overseas and budget of debris 25th. Can I ask you now with the consequences of slashing overseas aid discussed at the G-7, overseas aid discussed at the G-7, and how did he explain to them that withdrawing life-saving aid to the poorest people on the planet thereby making them even more dependent on Russia and China would in the long run make us all safer and more secure?

16:50

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

Can I just say to the honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I just say to the honourable gentleman that occasionally he is gentleman that occasionally he is wrong. Very occasionally... The Prime Minister made a statement about defence spending and it was a statement that was applauded right across European families and across European families and certainly in the Argeen states, and it was -- United States and it was it was -- United States and it was essential. The foreign minister came back and made another statement about reading efforts within Europe and I was sat right next to him.

The honourable gentleman needs to get his eyes tested. On the issue of development aid which is an important issue, we have not made an ideological decision, we do not want badges -- cliff edges and it's important that the honourable member knows that when one looks at foreign possibility -- policy, diplomatic efforts and hard power this is a family of tools. He should never forget the war in Ukraine has cost the African continent 7 billion, it's right that in our defences but is also right that we continue to spend aid in Ukraine.

spend aid in Ukraine.

16:51

Johanna Baxter MP (Paisley and Renfrewshire South, Labour)

- -

I think my constituency neighbour who was reading my notes earlier raising the issue that he did but I will raise it again because I don't believe that we can, I don't believe we can see enough about the 19,546 stolen children from Ukraine and the humanitarian research lab at Yale University who have just had their funding cut by the United States were not only trying to reunite those children with their families, they were also documenting some of the war crimes that are currently taking place.

Can my right honourable friends a little more about how we are going to ensure that work is not lost and also can he say what we are doing to support families who will be reunited with children who will be so severely traumatised.

16:52

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

I'm grateful to the honourable lady, can I just reassure her that UK does continue to check Russia's deportation of Ukrainian children which is a clear violation of international law. I met with Madame Zelensky in Kyiv back in February, the UK was very pleased to see another group of children returned by a Qatari mediation in September 2024, we consistently raised awareness of child deportations in our munication is on the cross multilateral fora, and of course in ensuring any changes we make to development spend that we are making sure that our commitments to humanitarian efforts are made to Ukraine, this is an area where she can expect to see the UK continue to fund support.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It's good to hear the G-7 believes that Iran should not be believes that Iran should not be allowed to build a nuclear bomb, a statement of the obvious. It's also

16:53

Rt Hon Dr Andrew Murrison MP (South West Wiltshire, Conservative)

- -

statement of the obvious. It's also good to hear President Trump has set a strongly worded letter to the Supreme Leader. Does the Foreign Secretary agree with me that the JCPOA was dead in the water the minute President Trump pulled out in 2018? He talks of what we might now do and that nothing is off the table, would he confirm that that includes military action?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I must let Mr Trump speak for

16:54

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

himself when he says that nothing offers -- is off the table in dealing with Iran. I am pleased that in working alongside the US they recognise the important role that we, the French and German play. They recognise the maximum pressure is essential and we have made clear to the Iranians that that step back and the sanctions that would follow squeezing the Iranian economy at a time when everyone accepts that Iran is weak is not what they want to see, so they need to get serious about their nuclear ambitions and we will work on all tracks, and of course he will have read just like I have that military endeavour is absolutely an option, certainly our Israeli colleagues remind us about on a pretty regular basis.

on a pretty regular basis.

16:55

Phil Brickell MP (Bolton West, Labour)

- -

May I draw the House as attention to my entry in the register of financial interests and welcome the Foreign Secretary statement today and also thank him for his leadership and shown over the last weeks in particular on Ukraine. The Foreign Secretary mentioned discussions he had had with his Canadian counterpart following the G-7 meeting he attended the is he able to share what further progress he has made in building much-needed

**** Possible New Speaker ****

coalition of the willing in order to guarantee Ukraine security? I'm very grateful to the

16:55

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

honourable gentleman. A number of nations are stepping up and coming forward, of course alongside the United Kingdom and France and Canada is absolutely one of them. I don't want to give a running commentary because there are further meetings this week and I think it is right that when we talk about committing troops, particularly that he will understand that different countries have different requirements in terms of going to their own parliaments, the way they speak to their own nations about these matters so it's right that I leave them to do that and don't announce, make announcements from the Dispatch Box.

16:56

Alison Bennett MP (Mid Sussex, Liberal Democrat)

- -

On 25 February the Foreign Secretary told me in this chamber that he was minded to move and I quote, from freezing to seizing Russian assets and I note you use that phrase again this afternoon. Given the increasingly mercurial nature of our American allies in their support of Ukraine what progress has been made and what is the Foreign Secretary's best estimate of when our Ukrainian friends will be held to benefit from those frozen assets? those frozen assets?

16:56

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

I understand why the honourable lady raises the question but as I said to the Liberal Democrat spokesperson this is not an issue where the US is the blocker, since you were there are nations within Europe that are more exposed than others. It is best as I said to the chair of the Select Committee that we act multilaterally, that is the we act multilaterally, that is the Big weekend for the Foreign Secretary in Canada representing our country and a big weekend for the Royal Navy in Plymouth, the Foreign Secretary alluded to increased cooperation with our EU NATO allies in terms of defence activity, in Plymouth this weekend the deputy French ambassador was down to unveil Ariadne, this is a new capability that the French and British navies now hold.

Unmanned, and crude, completely autonomous and to end, 12 completely autonomous and to end, 12 metres long underwater, mine countermeasures vessels. The remarkable feat of technology and will he join me in celebrating this feet corporation? -- Feet of cooperation? cooperation?

16:58

Bradley Thomas MP (Bromsgrove, Conservative)

- -

Can I say first to my honourable friend and thank him for his service. He will be pleased that's maritime security is such a big discussion point at the G-7 and I thank Canada for that. We are a thank Canada for that. We are a great maritime nation, working with our colleagues and can I assure him there will be more -- there will be more on this issue in the SDR which is to follow.

16:58

Richard Tice MP (Boston and Skegness, Reform UK)

- -

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement, it seems to me that Putin views the failure to seize the frozen assets as a sign of Western weakness. If there are some reluctant countries in this, given that the prime ministers rightly leading a coalition of the willing, could the Prime Minister and the government lead a coalition of those patients who will seize those frozen assets?

16:59

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

Can I say that it's right and proper is right across Europe we see a cost of living crisis that we pull a cost of living crisis that we pull -- pool our efforts but also in respect of Treasury Department and Finance Minister's are satisfied that this would not have a detrimental effect on the global economy, those are the necessary discussions that are being had. He knows my emphasis, but can I assure him that Europe is more united on these issues than we are currently seeing from reform.

16:59

Steve Yemm MP (Mansfield, Labour)

- -

I would also like to thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement Foreign Secretary for his statement to the House today. Last week I hosted a Westminster Hall debates on the International fund for Israeli- Palestinian peace and I wonder if the Foreign Secretary could advise the House if he was able to raise the matter at the G-7 foreign ministers meeting, and that he might commit to a further meeting with MPs to discuss the U.K.'s commitment to to discuss the U.K.'s commitment to

17:00

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

Well, we were able to discuss Gaza and link that discussion to broader, a broader discussion on development spend and a commitment to Gaza. He will know particularly that the United Kingdom supports the Palestinian Authority and can I assure him that I or indeed the Minister for the Middle East will Minister for the Middle East will meet and discuss these issues then.

17:00

Rt Hon Jeremy Corbyn MP (Islington North, Independent)

- -

In his statement, the Foreign

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In his statement, the Foreign Secretary describes blocking the way to Gaza as unacceptable. Can you also confirm that it is illegal and also confirm that it is illegal and in breach of international law and the bombardment of Gaza is likewise as is the bombardment of the West as is the bombardment of the West Bank? Can he say that we will no longer continue security cooperation longer continue security cooperation or to supply weapons to Israel while they continue to illegally occupy

17:01

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

**** Possible New Speaker ****

they continue to illegally occupy the territory in both Gaza and the West Bank? Can I say to the right Honourable gentleman that I did say in my contribution that it is in breach of international humanitarian law and, of course, we have spoken to the Israelis about those concerns and indeed, he will recall the decision I made back in September of last year to suspend arms and it was largely because of that breach.

17:01

John Slinger MP (Rugby, Labour)

- -

Earlier today in Parliament, I chaired an event to remember the victims of the appalling chemical weapons attack on 16 March, 1988, carried out by the vicious Saddam Hussein regime. They think the UK for our help over the years. Does my right honourable friend agree that this and current crises show the need for a strong UK and what I mean by that is strong Armed Forces, diplomats, soft power, alliances in diplomats, soft power, alliances in Africa, Europe and the Gulf and these would be designed to protect these would be designed to protect the rules-based system.

17:02

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

The Honourable gentleman put his remarks incredibly well. Can I associate myself with the remarks he made about that appalling atrocity and absolutely set crystal clear that the United Kingdom has -- as AP five-member -- as a P5 member say that it is so important to support that. It is hugely, hugely important. important.

17:03

Richard Foord MP (Honiton and Sidmouth, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Last spring, the UK joined the United States in conducting five combined joint naval and air strikes against them Houthis. This weekend -- this week, the US conducted their strikes without support from the UK. Why the change question record doesn't signal about the foreign policy?

17:03

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

Foreign Secretary.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, the United Kingdom was involved in supporting US efforts on involved in supporting US efforts on refuelling to extend. I don't think it would be right for me to comment on the detail of any military on the detail of any military exercise. Can I reassure him that we continue to work very closely with

17:04

Jim Shannon MP (Strangford, Democratic Unionist Party)

- -

continue to work very closely with our friends in the United States and, as he would expect, I was briefed on these issues alongside

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the Prime Minister and others. Jim Shannon. Can I thank the Secretary of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I thank the Secretary of State for the statement and his strong words which is appreciated. I strong words which is appreciated. I very much welcome the support for very much welcome the support for Ukraine and support for a peaceful resolution in Israel and Gaza. resolution in Israel and Gaza. However, piece cannot move with Russia and Hamas murderers. What more can be done in the interim to ensure that children both -- on both sides can have the food, medicine and clothing and education and that these complex needs are sorted out?

17:04

Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Foreign Secretary, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Tottenham, Labour)

- -

I'm sure the whole house is hugely grateful for the humanity that the Honourable gentleman has shown once again. On the issue of children on both sides of this conflict. I think it is horrendous that when one looks at the scenes of those hostages coming out, that -- hooded young men, children can be seen. At the same time, cannot be right to starve children of humanitarian aid, medical supplies they need at this time. Whilst we seek to deal with the problems of Hamas and getting those hostages out.

I always in my remarks hold up the prospect of a two-state solution as a way through this most complex and difficult challenge. Are very grateful for the way in which the Honourable gentleman has raised this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

point today. I will give the frontbenchers a Program Program motion, Program motion, minister Program motion, minister to Program motion, minister to move.

17:06

Legislation: Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill: Remaining Stages (Day 1)

Program motion, minister to move. Program motion, minister to move. The question is the Children's Bill. As many of that opinion, say "Aye". As many of that opinion, say "Aye". Those in the contrary, say "No". I think the Ayes have it. The Ayes have it.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Children's well-being and Schools Bill as amended by the public committee to be considered.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

committee to be considered. We will begin with new clause 18

17:07

Stephen Morgan MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Portsmouth South, Labour)

- -

17:21

Neil O'Brien MP (Harborough, Oadby and Wigston, Conservative)

- -

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I want to concentrate today on 36 banning phones from schools. This new clause would also write into law some of the content from the very good Private Members' bills drafted good Private Members' bills drafted by the honourable member for Whitehaven and Workington because this doesn't need to be a party political issue. When I was on the Science and Technology Committee Science and Technology Committee batting -- back in 2018 I got to the report on screen time, social media and children's mental health. Back then the evidence was already very then the evidence was already very concerning.

But by now every alarm bell should be ringing. Over the bell should be ringing. Over the last decade there has been explosion in mental health problems among young people all over the world. Over the exact same period that smartphones and social media have become dominant in children's lives. The growth in mental health promises focused on most entirely on young people not older people. Children now get smartphones at a very early age, as the Education Select Committee points out, one in five of the U.K.'s three and four-year-olds now have their own smartphone.

By the end of primary school for out of five kids have a smartphone. There are many channels, many different ways through which smartphones and social media cause problems for children. They displace time in the real world with friends, US data shows that children spend over two hours that they -- with friends but that has halved. The proportion of children feeling lonely at school has exploded all over the developed world. It's not just a time sink, is also the lack of sleep.

Children are tied in school. ADHD has increased tied in school. ADHD has increased massively concentration is impaired. This is a feature not a bug, apps are designed to be addictive and drip feed you dopamine. Recent school meeting I organised in my constituency I heard from local doctors and excessive screen time is damaging eyesight and giving young kids the kind of back problems you might expect from someone in late middle-aged. 8/10 children are now exposed before age 18, many of the really young age.

The average age sees porn at age 13. A shift to a child exposed to graphic violence, extortion, self-harm and doing terrible things to girl self-image. According to the ONS one in five children aged 10 to 15 say they have been bullied online 72% happening during school time. As well as being bad in their own right these different negative effects also, together damage education. While a banner phones in schools can't fix everything it's a vital first step and it can make a big difference in I spoke to one Head Teacher who said that when they went from a policy of phones not being out to a full start of the data the end of the day ban with fines handed in the number of detentions that they had to hand out

**** Possible New Speaker ****

fell by 40% and teacher recruitment and retention improved as well. I thank the shadow minister for giving way and please take this as a constructive intervention as a former teacher I do know some of the challenges of mobile phones, the Minister will remember my debate on financial education when hers went off. I would ask the shadow minister to consider groups that may require to consider groups that may require a mobile phone, I gave the shadow

**** Possible New Speaker ****

a mobile phone, I gave the shadow minister hinted what I was going to mention particularly young carers who do need that can't contact with family The honourable member has bullion

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The honourable member has bullion the anticipated going to make and if the anticipated going to make and if you look at the text of the amendment he will see it is carefully drafted exactly to allow carve outs of those who do need them for example as health devices I hope you is reassuring that point. Attempts by the tech industry lobby to muddy the water to run interference and to circumflex -- to confusion on convincing the problem sitting our children all of the world and not just a coincidence, there's more and more evidence for a Questions asked about adult mental health combined into a question score, they asked the same people when they first got a smartphone and the results were stark.

The earlier you get a phone the worse your mental health, particularly for girls as with smoking this powerful social gradient also developing with smartphones and social media that's going to widen gaps in achievement and something really decisive has done. Sadly many people still don't know unfortunately about the risks Of parents do know under worried about the problems of smartphones and social media. We face a collective action problem, we worry our kids will miss out if they're the only ones without them. That's a problem that needs solving government needs to be part of it.

Across the country there is an explosion of parents powered campaign groups aiming to fight back. Smartphone free childhood, safe screens, delay smartphones, which against the screen campaign. Over the last year they have gained hundreds of thousands of members and together with the shadow Secretary of State and the Leader of the Opposition we met with some of them this morning, I pay tribute to their work. For him giving way, when I'm visiting schools across my constituency of Epping Forest many of the schools have instituted policies banning mobile phones or indeed our consulting to do that.

Sometimes there is a small degree of pushback from pupils and sometimes indeed from parents, but does my noble friend agree with me that if the government takes up this amendment actually a woman to clearer and easier for schools to ban these phones and actually protect, produce a safe and nurturing environment for our pupils in school and it will be easier to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

take it forward? He is completely correct and I was going to come on to that very was going to come on to that very point. The Children's Commissioner has said I honestly think that we will look back in 20 years time and be absolutely horrified by what we be absolutely horrified by what we allowed our children to be exposed allowed our children to be exposed to. She is right. The very first thing government could do with him to proper ban on phones in our schools, I met with parent kind recently and they said effectively To To digital To digital drugs To digital drugs and To digital drugs and allowing To digital drugs and allowing the dealers into schools.

That's got to change will stop the last government issued guidance on this good start but not enough and is not working. While 90% of schools say they have some sort of policy or ban, a survey by policy exchange last year found that only one in 10 secondary schools has a full start to finish ban, the policy works best. But the schools are trying policies work it out the phones on them but not by stab them out, actually the effect is the kids are distracted, the teachers at the stop lessons to sell and to put them away and you get all this is about leaving and social media during break times unlawful stop as a Labour member pointed out the other day, introduced by the previous government is not working.

We stab students using phone during break time in essence, the problems this causes us in the can. Had many teachers say to me this takes up so much time, huge distraction that interferes with learning we are now in a strange situation where Labour MPs and the Conservative party agree that the guidance has turned out not to be enough but the Labour frontbench is insisting that it is, we are through the looking glass. Why do we need a full banner not guidance? Generally I want to give autonomy to schools but the guidance isn't working.

The DfE's own survey published in April last year and that 35% of secondary school teachers reported mobile phones being used during lessons without permission, the problem is more pronounced folder children, 46% of pupils in years 10 to 11 reported mobile phones being used when they shouldn't have during most all lessons last month the survey by parent account despite parent kind found that nearly half of secondary school children so they see phones being used in class when they shouldn't every civil day. The idea that the guidance has done the trick and is no longer a problem to solve is contradicted by the departments and the government-owned data.

Second we need to support schools and have their back, I know from speaking to teachers and school leaders that pressures from minority of parents to allow phones can be very severe full stop minority of parents can be unreasonably determined they must be able to contact the child any minute of the day, but unfortunately that comes at the cost everyone else's education. As my honourable friend pointed out a national ban is much simpler, we the politicians should take the flak and take the heat off of schools.

Third, full and full on ban is needed as the start of the wider resetting of social norms and children's smartphones and social media. We need a proper band so did smartphones put away for a whole day including breaks break should be about physical activity not just scrolling and scrolling. Schools should be the beachhead of first place where we recreate the smartphone free childhood that most of us got to enjoy. Seven hours in which we de-normalise being on your phone all the time for young people.

Baron Flight is a school will of course not solve all the province overnight but as a vital first step. When I was a health minister wants us to develop an equivalent for this of five bits of fruit and veg a day or all the members might remember public health campaigns like don't die of ignorance. We need to do some big things to reset the culture and the heavy exposure of our kids to addictive design products from the addictive design products from the The other day the Education Secretary said that phones have no place in schools.

Having initially claimed that our proposal for a ban was a gimmick, the Education Secretary, now seems to be executing a very slow version. We need to get on with it. A pattern is emerging. At the start of the debate on this will, many in the profession pointed out... The secretary said that was not true. It turned out it was us who did not understand the legislation. Michael Gove was being held up as the great Satan of education.

In the most recent speech, he has become a great speech, he has become a great education reformer. Banks -- banning phones in schools was a gimmick but now they are voting for it. We can see where this is going. Tonight, labour should swallow their pride, vote for our amendment and do the right thing for our children.

17:31

Helen Hayes MP (Dulwich and West Norwood, Labour)

- -

Education Select Committee Chair. clause 3 and new clause 4, both in my name. The Education Select committee was given a short time to look at this bill. We are trying to Were holding an additional evidence session to look at part two. I'm grateful to all the witnesses who came to give us their evidence. We have published a report for the Secretary of State setting out recommendations based on the evidence we received. Broadly, the committee welcomes the scale of the government's ambition, as expressed in this bill, which is a key plank of the government opportunity mission to break the link between people's background and their future success.

We joined the government in wanting to see high and rising standards in education and care systems to protect vulnerable children and ensure educational opportunity for every child. We welcome the measures in the bill to strengthen child protection, particularly the provisions to establish multiagency child protection teams, including education and safeguarding arrangements and a single unique identifier for children which has the potential to be a genuinely transformative tool for the delivery of many support for children and young people. We support the children's social care market and oversight scheme.

Action to remove profiteering in the young people's social care sector is long overdue. The committee measures the committee welcomes measures in the bill -- the committee welcomes measures in the bill. The committee also made some recommendations on ways in which the bill could be further strengthened based on the evidence we received. The amendments tabled in my name directly relate to our recommendations and I will now turn to each of the ones that are relevant to part one of the bill. New clause 3 would require the government to publish and consult on government to publish and consult on a draft national offer for care leavers within 18 months of the act coming into force.

A national care offer with set minimum standards for local care offers and ensure greater consistency between local authority areas. A national offer would act as a floor, not a ceiling, it would not be designed to prevent innovation at the local level or to stop additional commitments from being made by individual local authorities. We believe that better national consistency driven by government would make a big difference. Evidence of the unacceptable outcomes for care living and people are shocking. 39% of care leavers are not in education, employment or training.

Compared to 13% of your -- all young people in the same age group. 14% of people in the same age group. 14% of young people with care experience go to university, compared to half of young people the same age. 25% of homeless people have been in care. Care leavers are hugely overrepresented in the criminal justice system. These are young people whose corporate parent has been the state. These statistics are clear evidence that for many of them, the state is not a very good parent.

So I welcome the government's amendment of the bill to introduce additional corporate parent responsibilities. But the committee heard very significant disparity in the support the different local authorities offered to care leavers. We heard about the differences in support with bursaries to pay for university accommodation, access to Wi-Fi to be able to study, and ring fenced apprenticeships for care leavers and local authorities. In a very powerful evidence session, the committee heard from young adults with recent experience of the care system, what witness told us -- one witness told us the postcode lottery is profound.

Another one pointed out that job centres were very ill- prepared and had no support for care leavers. There were certain grants she could have had to get back into education but the job centre did not inform her. She said, in fact, everything of the now is from googling things or asking people. A national care offer would be the foundation for building better, more consistent support for care leavers everywhere in the country. It will provide the government with an effective mechanism for local holding local authorities accountable for their provision -- mechanism for holding local authorities accountable for their provision.

It would stop the current disincentives. I urge the government to support clause 3. New clause 4 would require health assessments of children in the care system. It would make assessing the mental health of children in care are a core part of the assessment of those children by ensuring a mental health practitioner is involved in that assessment. Children care are significantly more likely to have experienced trauma and abuse than their peers and are consequently more likely to experience mental ill-health.

In 2021, 41% of children care had a mental health disorder, care had a mental health disorder, rising in those in residential care. The care experience young adults who gave powerful evidence of the committee spoke strongly about the urge -- urgent need for better mental health support. The suggested local authorities were not always fulfilling those obligations. One of our witnesses told us, growing up, it was only physical assessments. We did not have mental health check ins at all. I think if my mental health was taken more seriously from a young age, if I had that person to check in with me, I would probably be so much better.

I would not have had mental health problems going. I do think that mental health seconds are equally important, if not more important as physical check ins for children in care. Another witness said, looked after children should get mandatory health assessments. They also referred to horrific weightless. Kerry -- children care should be fast tracked. We heard about with -- we heard from a Therapy. He said a loss could be explained if they understood the experience of trouble. It will take time, it will not go away at night and sometimes it gets worse before it gets better.

No one talks about that. You will not be OK if you are going into care. There is a reason why you are there. It's important the minute you go into care, every child should have a mandatory assessment, physical and mental and there should be support for them. It is the trauma that underlies the decision to take a child into care. Abuse, neglect, bereavement or exploitation that often has the most profound impact on their lives. Care system needs to place dealing with the trauma in a child-centred way at its heart, ensuring that mental health assessments are probably properly undertaken.

Mental health must be assessed before treatment can be provided. New clause 3 would help to deliver this refocusing of the system, which is badly needed and I urge the government to supported. -- Support it. Finally come I want to make a couple of points. I wish to add my support to the amendment from the honourable member for Mitcham. It would introduce the need to inform a GP when a child is placed into care. I see the impact of poor quality, unstable accommodation in children in my constituency every week.

Temporary accommodation is hurting children. The lack of space to do homework, the fear and insecurity of sharing a kitchen, bathroom with strangers, the physical health impacts of living with damp and mould or the impact on gross motor development in a space that is too small to play or crawl in. It should small to play or crawl in. It should be a statutory requirement to inform the public services that can help mitigate such impacts and who have a responsibility towards that child's health and well-being.

The government should be taking urgent action to reduce the numbers of people, especially families with children, in temporary accommodation but in the short term, new duty would make a difference to the support they receive. Finally, at the same time as were debating this bill, the government is preparing to announce reforms to the welfare system. I wish to emphasise the vital importance of considering the impact of any proposed reforms on children. Children do not get to choose the families into which they are born.

Each one is equally deserving of economic security and access to the resources they need to thrive. It is not a justifiable outcome of changes to the welfare system to make life harder for the poorest children are to increase child poverty by limiting the access to the support their parents receive. The government must undertake and publish an assessment of the impact of its welfare reforms on children and it must ensure that children do not suffer as a result

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of any planned reforms. Liberal Democrat spokesperson. Thank you very much, Madam Deputy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. It's a pleasure and a privilege to rise to speak on part one of this bill and in particular one of this bill and in particular to the new clauses and amendments tabled in my name. When this bill headed second reading, I said there headed second reading, I said there was much in here, in this bill, that we under Liberal Democrat inches welcomed alongside areas which we

17:41

Munira Wilson MP (Twickenham, Liberal Democrat)

- -

welcomed alongside areas which we would amend and strengthen. It has seen plenty of discussion and opportunities to constructively strengthen the legislation, although the government has failed to accept any amendments that were not its own, despite comments from the Minister at the outset. I'm very grateful to colleagues across the house who served on the committee where I think we had some excellent debates. However, was disappointed to see last week the sheer number of amendments tabled by the government ahead of report stage and I hope the government doesn't make a habit of depriving a committee of its chance for proper scrutiny even if most of those measures are welcome -- unwelcome and controversial.

Now, turning to amendments in my name. As the Minister knows, care and kinship care is a subject that is close to my and my Liberal Democrat colleagues hearts. We discussed a number of encouraging provisions included in the bill under the definition of kinship care and setting out the support that kinship carers are eligible for in law and providing additional educational support for children in kinship care. However, what we agreed at committee falls far short of the ambition I've heard the Secretary of State herself set out at a reception for kinship carers just a few months back.

At that reception, the Secretary of State and usually for somebody in her position, called on campaigners and policymakers to keep pushing her. I believe my new clauses tabled in my name, new clause 25, 26, 27 and 28, do just that. New clause 25 will ensure that kinship carers are entitled to paid employment leave, new clause 26 would put into statute and entitlement to an allowance on par with that of foster carers, new clause 27 would extend remain close to all children in kinship care based on the definition that has been agreed in this bill.

And finally, new clause 28 would prioritise those same children for school admissions. Kinship carers are unsung heroes. They often step up no notice to look after a child. There related to or now because there are no longer parents -- because their parents can no longer do so. They want to do the right thing out of love for those family members but financial and other barriers often stand in their way. And survey revealed that over 45% of kinship carers give up work and a similar number have to reduce their hours permanently co-opting financial strain on the family.

Those carers are disproportionately women and are overrepresented in the healthcare, education and social care sectors which simply exacerbates our workforce. In committee, the Minister pointed to the kinship financial allowance private, which were set out in the tiny number of local authorities with a very small subset of kinship carers. They are not ambitious enough. I say again we must go further and give kinship carers parity with foster carers and we know that this will help save money both in the short term as well as in both in the short term as well as in Want to turn to the amendment tabled in my name which will include independent special schools and the provisions of thousand clause 15, the backstop of a profit limit on certain social care providers.

I will say at the outset that I as a liberal recognise the importance of private, voluntary sector and state provision in this area as well as in many other areas of public services. However in this case it is clear that we have a market that is simply not functioning and there are providers who are shamelessly profiteering from the lack of specialist provision leaving local Spending on private special educational schools has risen from 48 million in 2018/19 to 74,000,024 -- 21/22 full to the schools are often backed by private equity firms charging exorbitant fees on double that of the state sector draining public funds.

Councils have no foot choice but to send children to the school store due to a lack of provision. Does she agree that extending the profit limit to the schools is essential to ensure their funding for children with special

**** Possible New Speaker ****

educational? I thank her for her intervention I haven't shared my speech with her but she has anticipated the next couple of points I was just about to couple of points I was just about to make so I do agree with her very strongly. I just want to preface my comments by saying there are many many independent special schools run many independent special schools run by private or voluntary sector providers who do an excellent job and are certainly not profiteering. and are certainly not profiteering.

In the way that I am about to set out. Clearly that is not the case across-the-board with some firms making upwards of 20% in profit and what they charge. We must challenge what they charge. We must challenge whether this is justified. The crisis in state special educational and disability provision and the lack of specialist places has led to a growth in private provision this crippling local authority finances as my run that my honourable friend has set out. In 2021/22 Council spent 1.3 billion on independent and non-maintained special schools, twice what they spent just six years previously and as my noble friend set out the average cost of one of those spaces was £66,710 which was twice the average cost of a state run special school place was we know that many of those companies running though schools are the very same private equity companies that are running the children's homes and fostering agencies which the power in clause 15 is designed to address.

I am therefore at a loss as to why the government has not included independent special schools and this provision and I urge them to think again and accept our amendment. My new clause 29 would impose a requirement on the Secretary of State to introduce a national well- being measurement program for children and people throughout England. I would like to pay tribute to pro bono economics and the wider well-being our coalition to this hard-working area. As I said several times during the passage of this bill I'm more than a little surprised to find so little about children's wellbeing in a bill that is entitled as such, with one in four children in the UK reporting low well-being according to data our country has the lowest ranked in Europe.

Data on children's wellbeing and mental health is fragmented across the NHS, schools and local authorities and it's crucial that we collect data to understand the challenges young people's faith, develop solutions and understand the efficacy through the use of robust well-being data. Turning to the Conservatives amendment ANSI 36 on well-being, phones and social media. This is a measure I welcome both as a parent and a parliamentarian. In this unprecedented digital act -- age weeds that treat phone addiction as a public health issue.

We have long supported the previous government guidance to schools to try and restrict mobile phones during the school day with importantly proper mitigations that teachers and Head Teachers can use for young carers, those with medical conditions using schools as the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

TracFone is a medical device and other local circumstances that only teachers are best placed to know. Is the honourable member aware of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Is the honourable member aware of the scheme brought in in Northern Ireland that Paul given which is to have all children some schools as a have all children some schools as a pilot scheme mobile phones in pouches therefore the mobile phone will never be on show as a method whereby this proposal by the Conservatives will be one that perhaps could be acceptable to all and there is a provision for those who are carers they must have their mobile phones.

So really Northern Ireland has shown by a pilot scheme,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

is grace that the House does migrate that the House has followed our lead. It's always an honour to be intervened on by the honourable intervened on by the honourable member for Stratford. -- Strangford. It's great to hear about the pilot in Northern Ireland because I read in the Republic of Ireland the in the Republic of Ireland the government had spent around 9 million issuing those pouches to schools across the country for schools across the country for schools to use for that purpose so would be good and useful and instructive for government to look at how that pilot runs.

I'm not sure we even need to wait for that pilot frankly, school leaders and parents are pressing us to go further now and we must listen. Putting the guidance and to Law Lords ensure that schools have the necessary support when their challenge on their policies and the resources and implement a mobile free environment. For instance one local teacher in my constituency told me it would cost £20,000 to his school budget to install lockers or phone pouches that the honourable member for Children must be able to learn in an environment free from the destruction of phones and the threat of bullying, we also seen that in school truancy has reduced significantly where these restrictions have been put in place

**** Possible New Speaker ****

robust. I welcome her comments on this amendment and I welcome the cross- party support which demonstrates this is a cross-party issue, it's not about party leadership. There not about party leadership. There she agree with me that the data and the evidence on this issue promoted by people like Jonathan Hay show by people like Jonathan Hay show by people like Jonathan Hay show that levels of literacy, numeracy and focus amongst children have accelerated really since the early 2010s, which coincides with the 2010s, which coincides with the accessibility that children had to phones and that really it's an open phones and that really it's an open and shut case of what this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

government should be doing now? I thank the right honourable lady for her intervention, the data is for her intervention, the data is alarming. The data in the books she alarming. The data in the books she references last week in Hampson my constituency the smartphone free childhood campaign organised a public meeting with local parents which was pretty full meeting and which was pretty full meeting and the data that was shared there was extremely alarming. I went both as a parent and as the local MP to listening and I'm afraid I found myself coming out of that even less myself coming out of that even less liberal than I was before I went in.

Slightly more authoritarian on this issue but mainly because actually it's the right liberal thing to do to allow our children to grow up with the freedom of being away from such a toxic environment. I would say gently to the right honourable lady those on the Conservatives and the Labour benches actually being in school is only a small part of a child's life. It's only a small fraction of their time and actually we need to look much broader than restricting phone use in schools so that was disappointing that neither Labour nor Conservative members support Liberal Democrat proposals to make the internet less addictive for children during the committee stage of the data use and access bill.

After the government decided to gut the honourable member for Whitehaven and Workington is safer phone spell which had a lot of cross-party support, the Liberal Democrat amendment to the data offered MPs an opportunity to protect young people from the doomed scrolling algorithms making such powerful changes to the way they live and interact. It's disappointing that ministers didn't take the opportunity with both hands and I hope they will think again is that bill progresses through this House. Final amendment I which -- wish to touch on is due welcome the honourable member for Lowestoft amendment to abolish the common law defence of reasonable punishment.

We defence of reasonable punishment. We need to ensure that all children are properly protected in law so they can drop safe, happy and healthy. The Liberal Democrats have been calling for this change for more than 20 years, we supported the law change in Scotland and Wales and is long overdue and when -- England as well to conclude there is much in part one of this bill on which there is cross-party consensus and there are a range of amendments from both sides the House that seek to ensure that the government goes further in safeguarding and promoting the well-being of our children.

It surely one of the most important Ministers are listening mode today and even if they don't take on board some of those amendments they will do so if the bill progresses to the other place, because after all this is our duty to ensure that every child in this country, not only survives but thrives.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It's a real pleasure to be able

17:55

Alistair Strathern MP (Hitchin, Labour)

- -

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It's a real pleasure to be able At the start of this important bill to speak to them really important amendments, also a body of work that moves forwards this country's protections and support for the most vulnerable people in society for the first time in such a long time. Before becoming an MP I had the privilege of being children's leader for the local authority I was serving on. There were many parents might have experience of being a grandparent as any local authority leader will note your corporate parent to many hundreds.

It's impossible in that role not to be moved by the testimonies of the young people you are working with. They've often gone through real moments of trauma, difficulty that would knock any of us for six. In the face of that their resilience, their determination to better themselves is something that we should all be inspired by, but that we all it as guardians of this country's collective obligations to young people in care to make sure we're setting them up to fill our side of that corporate parenting role as well guys I'm incredibly happy to see government amendments to 18 through 22 today widening the role of corporate parenting to other local stakeholders.

As a local local stakeholders. As a local authority lead working with experienced complainers I was happy to be to take on some of this work at a local level working with some fantastic local stakeholders to broaden our obligations to corporate parents and to bring other local government bodies into the sphere of those we are trying to Debast by the young people we had now care. It's clear that in isolation that can't be good enough and without clear legislation requiring more local stakeholders to take on that important role we are never going to be able to get all of the partnerships involved that can have such transformative impact in supporting young people in care and that crucial early stage.

No parent would only think about a young person as their child in a subset of their role in the state of obligations of corporate parent should be noted to that. I'm glad to see these amendment coming for today I know many in this House and beyond have been campaigning on for some time including my honourable friend the Member for Whitehaven that recommended some of these measures in his support -- report of years ago. Very glad that having seen very little action on this under the previous government this covenant is wasting no time on widening that obligation and widening the corporate parents to have the back of some of our young people in care right across the country I was glad to see some of the amendments strengthening information sharing bring put forward today as well having had to read a lot of difficult case reviews of the tragic incident happening to young people right across the country due to failures information sharing and failures of agencies to work together effectively, strengthening that has got to be a core part of our approach to bettering obligations to young people to safeguarding and young people in this country right across the local authorities and work with them.

Seeing that information sharing and seeing that strength and multiagency working is truly welcome. In addition to that there is a number of other important clauses in the of other important clauses in the Clauses 8 and nine Clauses 8 and nine strengthening obligation to care leaders is welcome. No parent received obligations to young people in care ending at the age of 18 and the state should be no different either. Ending the perverse circumstances whereby a child who is leaving care could be ruled intentionally homeless and making sure that we got a stronger and more widely available care offer to those who are leaving care hopefully means that local authorities across the country can be empowered to do more to live up to that obligation we'll have us parents to do right by young people long into adulthood.

There are a number of other strengthening is that the government may not be bringing forward today but I'm sure we need to continue to revisit as we go forward monitoring how this new obligation local authorities play out, because doing right by these young people cannot and at 18 and it has to make sure we got our continuing to consider how our role as parents continues long into children's life and into young adulthood. Many of the young people I worked with as a local authority lead would welcome that extra support many will be welcoming of that start support being made in the spell today.

Alongside that I think it's a well appreciated fact right across the House now that the overly bureaucratic care system hasn't was done enough to recognise the importance of wider family networks really important moments of young people's life. The build springing forward stronger commitments around decision-making and welcoming the importance of kinship carers strengthening the support available to those kinship carers are truly welcome. The government record financial commitment to expanding kinship care pilots are making sure we start to understand the value that wider financial support could have in enabling more young people to be looked after by a wider member of family networks rather than of family networks rather than In order to do right by young people I note that there should be further conversations about smart phones.

In responding to the Private Members' Bill on a safer phones, I will come to hearing the Minister's commitment to continuing to do more in this space in the future. In the meantime, today, very happy to be supporting the bill. I'm very happy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to let him intervene. I think you'll find that what the committee did was do some research.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He committed to bringing forward a statement with some important a statement with some important aspects of online health that were not commented on before. I would not commented on before. I would suggest that if the opposition... I thank my honourable friend and can I thank my honourable friend and can I ask him, of the six education secretaries we've had since 2019, secretaries we've had since 2019, did any of them propose banning mobile phones in schools or is this the latest bandwagon from the Opposition? I thank my honourable friend who could not put it better.

I completely recognise that this is a really important topic. It is important for parents and schools in my constituency as well. But the idea that the last government had 14 years to do so... There is no consensus as to the best way to bring about such a ban. I'm afraid it was disingenuous at best. I share a lot of their concerns and I hope over time to be able to work across this house to bring forward protections to that effect. But what I simply will not do is indulge in trying to turn this issue into an opportunity to pasture for a party that had so long and did so little in this area.

In conclusion, I'm very glad to be supporting a bill that considers -- delivers step changes for care leavers and chip carers. For too long, we've not done enough to support the most vulnerable young people. I'm glad that this bill is doing that and that the government has committed to do far better.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I urge members to ensure they keep language respectful at all times. Stephen Barclay.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

times. Stephen Barclay. I rise to speak to clause 9 of the bill. To the important issue of looked after children, I know this is something that many people across the house care about. That is the the house care about. That is the reason why the bill so disappointing in terms of the missed opportunity. Particularly on the concern I have Particularly on the concern I have in terms of providing cheaper in terms of providing cheaper housing and looking after children in particular communities.

Just to take those issues in order. Firstly, on the issue of supply. And certainly in Bill Committee, there is a lot of discussion around profiteering and I'm sure the Minister would respond to me pointing out these issues and pointing out these issues and addressing them by diverting -- pivoting to talk about clawback. The Minister will find that it has since moved. It would help of the Minister could clarify what estimate they gave the Treasury as to how much money they expect to recover via clawback.

There is a suspicion it would be particularly effective. Likewise, I think there's missed opportunities in terms of reducing demand and I very much echo the points that my right honourable friend made in capital Committee around boosting foster carers. An issue again are frequently debated across the house. It is not a panacea to all children -- all issues surrounding children but we would have expected the bill to go further in that regard. It's also the case that what the government needs doing is doing in terms of unaccompanied child migrants is further exacerbating demand.

I point 2023 Home Office research that showed not only a massive increase in the number of unaccompanied child migrants but disputed cases where people were claiming to be a child when the concern was they were an adult, and half of those, 49% of those cases, the individual was found to be an adult. Again, that is further stoking demand and it is a disappointment the government is not taking action to reduce that demand.

18:05

Rt Hon Steve Barclay MP (North East Cambridgeshire, Conservative)

- -

Again, clause 9 is silent on those issues. But my principal concern, my issues. But my principal concern, my main concern, representing a real main concern, representing a real committee, is that the bill risks further concentrating looked after children in a way that does not join across government silos with areas across government silos with areas like police funding or housing. And perhaps I will just give the house a specific example of that. Cambridgeshire, because it has had significant population growth but the police funding is based on the population as it was in 2012, that is how the police grant is calculated, does not pick up the additional pressures that the Cambridgeshire force is facing and particularly facing in rural communities.

That is then exacerbated, particularly where we have those were looked after children with a troubled history interacting with the criminal justice system or indeed some of the challenges around unaccompanied child migrants. And there is nothing in this bill that says that where regional commissioning is used, how regional commissioning is used, how that is into playing into the police formula, the police funding, even though the formula is clear that a significant proportion of their time is spent, as a consequence of this policy, and just one example of that is when a child goes missing.

And quite rightly, when a child goes missing, it is an issue of significant concern and that is something that the police should prioritise time to but where you have a concentration of care homes in rural communities, that can be a significant additional resource that they face. In conclusion, clause 9 of the bill, I think, fails to address supply, fails to address demand, but in particular where I would push the Minister in his or her closing is what will be done around the fact that it is further divorced from the rural communities were often this commissioning is placed.

And with a government that is hammering rural communities in so many areas, not least in farming, how is the government going to reassure my constituency that the failure for the money to follow the looked after children sufficiently is going to be addressed. And I finish with just one example, which is the recent data coming from councils. The Home Office reimburses councils for spending on children under 18 and councils reported in February saying that those payments from central government do not cover all the cost.

The risk is a rural community that have been hammered by this government on farming and so many other areas will then have to pick up the police because, the health service impacts and other impacts on public services that come from more distant, regional commissioners, which is exactly what clause 9 risks doing and it would be clause 9 risks doing and it would be helpful if the Minister could say a bit more about that when he comes too close. too close.

18:09

Tristan Osborne MP (Chatham and Aylesford, Labour)

- -

Thank you. I rise to support this bill and the amendments tabled by the government. Specifically, I will be talking about new clauses 18 to 22 on kinship and also in reference to clause 36, the opposition close. As a former schoolteacher, I believe these decisions are broadly welcomed by my constituents and also the professionals in care and in the education sector. And, of course, the context behind this bill and its amendments is 14 years of cuts to many secondary schools, to social care services and councils across the country.

And successive cuts have been made to schoolteachers and those supporting children at the frontline where many children are left in conceptual -- contextual settings that were inappropriate. And, of course, we have had six education secretaries since 2019 under the opposition. If I could now get to the specifics. New clauses 18 to 22 tabled by the Secretary of Corporate parenting. I welcome the provision for care leavers, including responsibilities indicated to local authorities to support the transition of young people into adulthood and independent living.

adulthood and independent living. This transition is always a period of tumult for many young people but for our most vulnerable, they do not have the support of parents to manage. I welcome the changes to the Housing act to clarify that care leavers should not be considered intentionally homeless and should be supported. I also support new clauses 44 to 46 which provide much-needed clarity on registered providers. In my area of Medway, many young people were placed with providers where people had serious contextual safeguarding concerns in many of these residencies were unregistered.

Unsurprisingly, these children ended up being involved with the police and through local authorities as the environment and management of these homes was in some cases and scrutinised and poor. As chair of the Community Safety Partnership, we regularly saw waves of criminality associated with some of these homes. Therefore, I will come the measures to tightened up -- tighten up the scrutiny on these regulators. I welcome the debate in 25 and by other members on kinship care in the UK. Kinship care plays a vital role in supporting children who are unable to live with their birth parents, offering them a familiar and supportive environment during a challenging time.

There are over 141,000 children in kinship care in England and Wales and they should be offered the same address as those in foster care. Children placed with relatives or close family friends are able to maintain stronger bonds as well as a connection to their community and culture. I would urge them to continue to support kinship care, working in dialogue with backbench MPs and charities and organisations. Lastly, I want to talk from my experience as a teacher on clause 36 on the effective management and planning of mobile phones.

Is safeguarding components specifically linked to part one. This is something that has significant merit issues around mental health, social And screen time. This is why I welcome the government's position of further research in this space. However, I might say many schools already operate policies to this effect, including no phones visible policy during the school day. We would need to get clarity as to the professional distance within any such amendment, including what would happen if a child were to be found with a phone.

With that lead to an immediate suspension or expulsion? What happens if a mobile phone is concealed? Teachers expected to challenge students and try to overturn their pockets? Is that a step too far? And lastly, there does need to be further were consulting where do we draw the difference between a mobile phone and a tablet device such as an iPad which many children might also bring into school but might also contain social media access. Is there not a conversation to be had engaging with social media providers and other companies to withdraw the use of services for those under 18 as opposed to stopping and holding the technology, especially given that we know that much of this is linked to out-of-school activity as well as in-school activity? There further debates that need to be had on this topic, rather than simply just jumping to the band.

Lastly, there are many things that students do in schools such as eating foods we might now agree -- not agree with but we have to be careful here. Digital devices and digital literacy is important if they are to grow up into adults that understand the context of the digital devices they hold. Banning can have a negative effect in terms of not allowing children to manage themselves on these devices. I just want to finish the amendments in this show the importance of holistic approach to In part one of this bill does lead holistically to other parts which will be discussed tomorrow and free breakfast clubs, cuts to school uniform costs and reforms of pain conditions.

I would urge all members

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to support these amendments. Thank you for calling me to speak on this important Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill. I wish Wellbeing and Schools Bill. I wish to focus my attention on two amendments, two new clauses. Firstly amendments, two new clauses. Firstly new clause 33. That I am calling

18:15

Mr Will Forster MP (Woking, Liberal Democrat)

- -

-- -- Sara -- Sara Sharif -- Sara Sharif my -- Sara Sharif my constituent. -- Sara Sharif my constituent. This comes out of the findings of the recent review conducted by the Children's Commissioner. I would like to thank the NSPCC and others who suggested a raft of great changes that could be made to the bill when it comes to approving how we look after children in the UK. The list can be endless with so many great contributions from many. Knowing what happened to Sara Sharif -- Sara Sharif, I know the system isn't protecting vulnerable children like it should.

It failed her. I'm hoping to one tie that fundamental not in the children Social care system. The sad reality is the level of support a child receives too often depends on their needs but on often depends on their needs but on where they live. And the thrush -- threshold that counsel has for stepping in and saving a child from abuse and neglect. As it stands today, there is an unacceptable inequality and how local authorities interpret thresholds for an intervention under section 17 of the Children Act 1989.

That means children at risk in one council area may receive early help and intervention if a family is in crisis. Yet in another they are left without the intervention that could protect them if not save their life. Every child in this country is effectively been entered into a postcode lottery. We are gambling with their lives by not attempting We need to look at the devastating case of Sara Sharif to understand the consequences of having a system that lacks consistency and clear national standards.

I don't think we can put a price on a child's life and only decide to step in based on resources. That is the current system. It is clear that social services over the years have struggled with deep cuts to funding and services. The Liberal Democrats and I have not yet fully confident that the new government will fully fund local authorities. Sara Sharif was just 10 years old when she was brutally murdered after sadly years of torture and slavery at the hands that were supposed to love her.

She was known to social services yet the response was not sufficient to protect. Would clearer national guidance with stronger thresholds for intervention have made a difference? In my opinion, yes. Would all referral such as those included ensure that professionals had the opportunity to intervene before it was too late? In my opinion yes will stop the law also need variation for children neither cross-country and critically requires the government to establish national standards for when and how children should receive help.

It sets out clear triggers automatic referral children Social care such as when primary caregiver enters custody or becomes an inpatient for mental health Or when a child is arrested. There are moments of profound instability in a child in that case, yet without that clear national standard, without having a proactive approach, too many slip through the cracks. My constituent Sara Sharif slipped through the cracks. That's why in January when I asked the Prime Minister if you would call free enquiry into the failing surrounding her death, he Begin one, we are still waiting for him to update the House.

The proposed changes were set expectations and how frequently a child situation should be reviewed. Cases likes hers reminds us that is not enough to assess once and step away. There needs to be updates and reviews regularly. The risk can escalate quickly. There are warning signs and it regulars Jackson not in With morbid consequences. This new clause is about accountability, consistency and most importantly protection. We cannot continue to accept a system where child safety depends on geography and resources rather than need.

I think MPs from across the House particularly the government have a moral duty to protect vulnerable children. There are so many children out there that are still in danger. I hope that MC 33 is agreed and if it is not agreed I hope the government would consider it and particularly when it comes to the debate in the other place. I also wish to draw the House attention to the honourable member for Lowestoft's amendment and C8 that I know has been referred to today.

That would ensure that corporal punishment could not be used as an offence in court if they are trying to hide grievous harmonic child. I don't think this is about preventing parents from reasonably rough reminding their children, it's about closing a legal loophole that abuses regularly use or attempted to use to evade justice. We saw this in the case of Sara Sharif whose father sought to use such a defence to avoid accountability for the terrible suffering tantamount to torture is what the judge said, that he inflicted.

No child should endure such brutality, no perpetrator should be able to hide behind those awful outdated legal justifications. I think we should standardise child protection this country enclose those loopholes that currently exist that abusers can exploit. This bill if amended right gives us that chance to do that. Let's take the opportunity to protect vulnerable children.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise today in support of new clause 8 tabled in my name and with the support of many colleagues

18:21

Jess Asato MP (Lowestoft, Labour)

- -

18:28

Rt Hon Damian Hinds MP (East Hampshire, Conservative)

- -

It's a pleasure to be able to join in this important debate today as it has been to serve on the Bill Committee. May I say I'm very Committee. May I say I'm very pleased that we have two days to debate this bill at report, really it is actually two bills. Which are very different in character and the first bill part one which we are debating today there is a very great deal that I think all of us in this House agree upon, in fact large parts were in previously published bill.

Some very important material, very important provisions covering children in care, covering special education, covering child protection. And so on.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He speaks of huge levels of authority given his previous roles, as a fellow MP he mentions special as a fellow MP he mentions special education. Would he agree with that we benefit from excellent services for our local schools particularly when it comes to special needs, when it comes to special needs, demand has doubled in the last four years and would he support my campaign to save the community college which is under threat of closure and it is going to be closure and it is going to be closed, could it not be better diverted to special educational to serve the local community?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

serve the local community? I'm grateful to my honourable friend and the constituency neighbour in Hampshire, she makes a very important point and I'm sure she is running a very effective campaign stop we look to the government to come forward with what we know is going to be a very broad, very large special education reform package but I think we don't yet know what is going to be in that. And what the implications are, of course we want children to be where it is right that child we want children to be able to be educated in the mainstream setting where they can benefit from that but we also know that some children it is right to be in special schools and having the full range of provision is the full range of provision is There is a great deal in this bill that I could speak about and we did speak about in committee.

But in pursuit of brevity, as I know you would wish me to, I will limit myself to talking about two aspects. One thing which is in the bill, and one thing which is conspicuous by its absence. The thing that is in the bill, and this is a peculiar thing to bring to the debate on the floor of the House of Commons because of something I have not had anybody disagree with. And there is no amendments down to speak to, to remain orderly.

I can speak with reference to government amendment 114 which is right next to it in the legislation. But I speak neither in favour nor against the principle of what I'm about to say. But it is an important reason which sometimes in this house it is precisely with measures where there is not disagreements that the greatest dangers lie because this house with its oppositional layout thrives people finding holes in what is being proposed and objected to. And with everyone saying the same kind of thing there is a danger things get through without the proper attention.

I have not yet said what I'm referring to. The thing I'm referring to the provisions on

This debate has concluded

Return to start of debate - Return to top of page