Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill
Debate between Baroness Blake of Leeds and Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle(6 days, 19 hours ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness in Waiting/Government Whip (Baroness Blake of Leeds) (Lab)
My Lords, I have absolutely no desire to stifle debate, but I ask anyone who wishes still to speak to be very mindful of the number of votes we are expecting at the end of this group. We also have very important dinner break business scheduled for tonight. Please be brief and to the point so we can move on with this important debate.
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP)
My Lords, I have two original points to make that have not been covered at all. We should bring ourselves back to the fact that there is an enormous amount of agreement around this Chamber. I think everyone will say we feel enormous sympathy for the families, some of whom are here today, who have lost family as a result of contact with social media. We all accept that we want 16 year-olds on the day of their birthday to be able to stride out into the world confident, capable, ready to step into adulthood. Most of us want to rein in the overwhelmingly powerful digital companies which have been allowed to run wild across the world by political decisions made by adults. I particularly commend the right reverend Prelate for naming the spectre in the room—Donald Trump and his tech bro friends. He is a spectre here and is now recorded in Hansard.
I say to the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron, that we have very broad agreement that the Online Safety Act has been a total failure and Ofcom is not delivering what it should be doing. Those are the points of agreement. Where my conclusions drive me is that I would back Amendment 91 from the noble Baroness, Lady Penn, with some caveats, which I will get back to, but it is not my intention to vote for any of the ban amendments before us today. I have a great deal of sympathy with the Lib Dems’ brave effort to find a way through a middle road and the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron, almost swayed me that we should make a gesture. The case I put, argument one, is that your Lordships’ House is not the right place: we are not the right people to be making this decision. Many of us have joined since the depths of Covid, but those who were here then will remember when the House went largely remote and lots of people who had never used a computer before were suddenly on Zoom. We met their grandkids: “There you are, Granny. You are off mute now”.
I invite your Lordships to look at the people around you. We are extraordinarily unrepresentative of the country in many ways, but particularly in terms of age. This is where I draw on the argument made by the noble Lord, Lord Russell, but come to a different conclusion. I was also in the learning centre and spoke to some of the same pupils. They overwhelmingly said, “We do not want a ban”. My argument is that we must stop doing politics to young people. We must give young people agency and a sense of control. We have bequeathed to them a disastrous, damaging world; failing to give them a say in this is absolutely the wrong way forward.
On that point, I have a serious proposal for the Minister. In the consultation, are the Government prepared to include a people’s assembly that represents young people from around the country? Rather than just asking young people to tick a box in a survey—we all know what happens with “yes” or “no” votes—this would give them the chance to deliberate on how they think we can control the future and improve their situation.
My second point is important and has not been said before. In this debate we have heard a huge amount of scapegoating of social media. Social media is a mirror: it reflects the misogyny, violence, racism and fake news that runs across and through our society, it does not create it. If we could wave a magic wand and get young people off social media, they would still be affected by the dreadful levels of poverty and the schools that operate as exam factories, putting them under tremendous pressure and subjecting them to unbearable discipline. They would still have parents who are struggling to put food on the table and keep a roof over their heads. They would still encounter all the misogyny and racism in our society. When we are debating and voting on this, we must understand that social media is a mirror; it is not creating where we are now.
Toilet-training: Support for Parents
Debate between Baroness Blake of Leeds and Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle
Baroness Blake of Leeds (Lab)
The voluntary community and faith sector are absolutely critical in this agenda. The whole basis of the Best Start family hubs model is to bring together all the relevant people in an integrated, coherent way, increasing communication and making sure that everyone who has a contribution to make is able to do so, putting children at the centre of everything that we do.
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP)
With increasing knowledge of the health impacts of microplastics and nanoplastics, and children facing a lifetime of an environment increasingly choked with plastics and other noxious substances, are the Government taking that into consideration when considering policy in the area raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Freeman? What are the Government doing to support parents to move towards reusable nappies rather than single-use?
Baroness Blake of Leeds (Lab)
The whole basis of the policy is that local is best and that these programmes are run through the local communities. I do not have the specific answers that the noble Baroness asks for, but all these considerations need to be taken into account. We need a holistic approach. People will be motivated by different aspects, and we need to bring that into the conversation so that we can make as much progress as we possibly can.
Resident Doctors: Industrial Action
Debate between Baroness Blake of Leeds and Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle
Baroness Blake of Leeds (Lab)
I thank the noble Baroness for her comments and the background. I shall particularly pick up on the issue of moonlighting, which she has raised before. As a point of reference, during the industrial action in 2022-24, it was picked up. There were isolated and anecdotal incidents of this behaviour. It is difficult to get accurate information, and with the current systems in place there is no clear or easy way to monitor the practice. However, resident doctors moonlighting while on strike is clearly unacceptable and in clear breach of the GMC code of practice. As I have said before, it is up to the employers to take any reports of this very seriously, and I am sure they will.
I echo the noble Baroness’s comments about the medical profession in this country. We have some extraordinary people working in the whole of the NHS, not just the doctors. It is a phenomenal organisation, and we believe it is our absolute duty to do everything we can to protect it and preserve it for the future, and to keep it true to its principles of delivering care free at the point of delivery and reaching everyone that needs it.
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP)
My Lords, I gave prior notice to the Minister that I want to ask a couple of questions about the Leng review into physician and anaesthetist associates which was published today, dealing with issues of high relevance to the concerns and the levels of dissatisfaction among resident doctors. Indeed, the review directly addresses some of the training issues for resident doctors which are set out in this Statement and which the Government say they are seeking to tackle, particularly rotational training and the lack of training places.
I have two questions. First, when and by what mechanism will Parliament, and particularly your Lordships’ House, have the chance to discuss the Leng report, given the high level of engagement on the statutory instrument that created the GMC registration of PAs and AAs in February 2024 and the level of expertise in your Lordships’ House?
Secondly, and this reflects many questions with which I am being bombarded by those concerned with these issues, some of the main recommendations of Professor Leng include the renaming of physician associates and anaesthetist associates as assistants. Professor Leng says they should not be seeing undifferentiated patients except within clearly defined national clinical protocols; they should get at least two years’ experience in secondary care when newly qualified before taking roles in primary care or mental health trusts; and there should be a named doctor as a line manager, which puts into question people operating as so-called locum physician associates.
Presumably, at least the first of these, the naming question, would require a new statutory instrument. Others may or may not. Can the Minister give me and all the other interested people some idea of how the Government are planning to take this forward?
Baroness Blake of Leeds (Lab)
The noble Baroness is certainly up to date as the report was published only this morning. If I am honest, asking such detailed questions at this stage is possibly slightly premature. We have committed to bringing in an implementation plan, which will be published in the autumn. The government-commissioned work has been very detailed. Professor Gillian Leng led the review, and the report sets out 18 recommendations that will give much-needed certainty and clarity to staff and patients. The Government are accepting these recommendations in full. By doing this, the Government have demonstrated their commitment to evidence-based policy informed by expert clinical advice, listening to patients and professionals.
I look forward to the implementation plan coming forward to make sure that we get some clarity. One of the most dangerous things is the lack of clarity that has surrounded these positions. The debate had, quite frankly, become polarised and in some cases toxic. That is not in anyone’s interest. Of course, there will be conversations between all interested parties following the report’s publication today and I look forward to discussions. I am sure it will come back to this place at the appropriate time.
Advertising Restrictions on Less Healthy Food
Debate between Baroness Blake of Leeds and Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle
Baroness Blake of Leeds (Lab)
We all know that the issues in the area of obesity are complex. The professor has laid out a compelling piece of research. We will continually review all the information available in this space. Obesity has a huge personal cost to children and to adults as they grow older, and also to society and the health department. It is essential that we get this right. As things stand, this is our policy and we are moving forward on it.
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP)
My Lords, the Minister appears to have answered by omission the part of the Question about whether there will be an impact assessment. Does she acknowledge that there are a number of brands for which the whole product range is, in essence, junk food, and that adding the occasional plastic sachet of apple slices or sugar-ladened fruit smoothie does not alter the fact that those brands being advertised will have a negative impact on our children?
Baroness Blake of Leeds (Lab)
As I said in my Answer, that was not in scope, so we cannot have an impact statement. That is the point we are trying to get over. Things are changing, and we know that there will be attempts to bring in other products, and so we have to be vigilant. That is why we are updating our nutrient profile model, making sure that we keep a close eye on exactly what is happening and how we can best protect future generations.
Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill
Debate between Baroness Blake of Leeds and Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle(7 months, 2 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP)
Before the Minister sits down, I asked about the fact that, apparently, 40% of 17-year-olds turning 18 are in unregulated or independent accommodation. Could the noble Baroness perhaps write to me about that?
Baroness Blake of Leeds (Lab)
I apologise: I knew that I had missed the noble Baroness’s question. Yes, of course I will write on that important point.