Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.
e-Petitions are administered by Parliament and allow members of the public to express support for a particular issue.
If an e-petition reaches 10,000 signatures the Government will issue a written response.
If an e-petition reaches 100,000 signatures the petition becomes eligible for a Parliamentary debate (usually Monday 4.30pm in Westminster Hall).
Increase the HMRC Mileage Rate from 45p/mile to 60p/mile
Gov Responded - 11 Oct 2022 Debated on - 3 Jul 2023 View Bob Seely's petition debate contributionsThe HMRC mileage rate for reimbursing the use of private cars (e.g. for employees but also volunteers) has been fixed at 45p/mile (up to 10,000 miles) since 2011. The lack of any increase since then is a serious disincentive to volunteer drivers particularly as fuel has gone up again recently.
Impose sanctions on China over its treatment of Uyghur Muslims
Gov Responded - 28 Jul 2020 Debated on - 12 Oct 2020 View Bob Seely's petition debate contributionsThe UK Government plans to introduce “Magnitsky law”, a law which targets people who commit gross human rights violations. Through this law or alternative means, this petition urges the UK Government to impose sanctions on China for their human rights violations on the Uyghur people.
These initiatives were driven by Bob Seely, and are more likely to reflect personal policy preferences.
MPs who are act as Ministers or Shadow Ministers are generally restricted from performing Commons initiatives other than Urgent Questions.
A Bill to amend the Titles Deprivation Act 1917 to deprive in certain circumstances Princes of their British Dignities and Titles.
A Bill to make provision about defamation; to make provision about costs awarded in civil cases; to make provision about the application of the rights to privacy and to freedom of expression in civil cases on matters of public interest; to make provision about the regulation of lawyers acting in civil cases; to make provision about data protection; to make provision for the regulation of private investigators; to make provision for the purpose of reducing the use of lawsuits for strategic purposes; and for connected purposes.
Marine Protected Areas (Bottom Trawling) Bill 2021-22
Sponsor - Chris Grayling (Con)
Desecration of War Memorials Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Jonathan Gullis (Con)
Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) published a report on CPS South East on 12 October 2021. The report found that the Area made strong charging decisions, and handled disclosure issues and victim and witness issues well. In addition, the report found that the quality of the Area’s RASSO casework was particularly good. HMCPSI will conduct a follow-up inspection of CPS South East next year to assess whether improvements have been made.
HMCPSI are currently conducting an inspection of CPS Wessex, which includes the Isle of Wight, and will publish the report on the Area later this year. Recent CPS performance data shows that the Area’s magistrates’ court conviction rate and domestic abuse conviction rate are both above the national average.
With the increasing volatility and interconnectedness of risks, strong national resilience is more important than ever. The UK Government’s Resilience Framework, published in December 2022, sets out a strategic approach to strengthening the systems and capabilities that underpin our collective resilience to all risks.
Work is already underway across Government to deliver on the principles and approach in the Framework and to act on lessons from recent crises. We have already refreshed the National Security Risk Assessment and will be updating the public National Risk Register later in the year. The Prime Minister has approved a new sub-committee of the National Security Council dedicated to resilience, led by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. We have also strengthened Cabinet Office crisis and resilience structures. The new Resilience Directorate leads on longer-term resilience planning, alongside the COBR Unit which leads on national crisis response and contingency planning.
The Government understands the huge significance of weddings. We recognise that because weddings have not been able to take place in recent months this has caused difficulty and distress for many people. As set out in the Government’s COVID-19 recovery strategy, published in May, the Government has been examining how to enable people to gather in slightly larger groups better to facilitate small weddings. We have worked closely with faith leaders and local government on how best to achieve this. The Prime Minister announced on 23 June that wedding and civil partnership ceremonies will be able to take place in England from 4 July. People should avoid having a large ceremony, and should invite no more than thirty family and friends. Venues should ensure they are COVID-19 secure.
As set out in the British Energy Security Strategy, the UK has an ambition to deploy up to 50GW of offshore wind by 2030, and the Government estimates that around 90,000 direct and indirect jobs could be supported by the offshore wind sector by 2030.
These jobs offer opportunities throughout the UK, including to the Isle of Wight, where Vestas Wind Systems A/S is already a key employer.
The Government is supporting research and development in offshore wind technology via the Net Zero Innovation Programme (NZIP), which will provide £60 million of funding for technologies including floating offshore wind and radar mitigation. Each of these programmes includes an element of matched funding from the private sector. The effectiveness of these programmes will be considered as part of the wider benefits evaluation work of the NZIP.
The Government also awarded £3.12 million to the innovative ERM-Dolphin project in 2020, which will develop a floating wind farm to produce green hydrogen at scale with a target capacity of 4GW by 2032.
The Government set out in the British Energy Security Strategy its ambition to deliver up to 50GW of offshore wind by 2030. The South-East stands to benefit from the growth of this sector with, for example, RWE developing the 1.2GW Rampion 2 project off the Sussex coast.
There is no single formal definition of an SME used by the UK government in designing government schemes. Schemes have different eligibility criteria depending on their aims. All businesses, including micro-businesses can apply to government schemes if they believe they meet the eligibility criteria.
The Government provides a range of support that all businesses, including micro businesses can access. These include information on starting up and running a business on GOV.UK, one to one advice via our free Business Support Helpline and through 38 Growth Hubs across England, government backed Start-Up Loans, and businesses with 5 or more employees can access our Help to Grow schemes.
The Government is providing a range of support to help small and medium-sized businesses across the UK with rising costs, including those in rural communities. The Government has cut fuel duty for 12 months, raised the Employment Allowance to £5,000, and is zero-rating VAT on energy-saving materials. This builds on existing support, including business rates relief worth £7 billion over five years.
Additionally, Help to Grow programmes will enable eligible SMEs to mitigate the effects of rising costs by providing financial discounts on approved digital technologies up to a value of £5000 and improving SME leadership and management skills though subsidised courses.
The setting of tariff rates, including the price variation between peak and off-peak periods for time-of-use tariffs such as Economy 7 is a commercial matter for individual supply companies. Electricity-only households who are on their supplier’s default or standard variable tariffs are protected by the energy price cap. The price cap methodology used by Ofgem enables a separate rate to be set for households who heat their homes using electric storage heaters. These households will also receive £200 discount on their electricity bill this autumn, as part of the Government’s package of support worth £9.1 billion to help domestic energy customers with the cost of rising energy bills.
The Government will introduce legislation to support the orderly resolution of rental payments accrued by commercial tenants affected by the pandemic. The legislation will ringfence rent debt accrued during the pandemic by businesses affected by enforced closures. The legislation will also set out a process of binding arbitration to be undertaken between landlords and tenants. This is to be used as a last resort after bilateral negotiations have been undertaken and only where landlords and tenants cannot otherwise come to a resolution.
On 22nd February, my Rt. Hon. Friend the Prime Minister published the Government’s ‘COVID-19 Response - Spring 2021’. The roadmap is a step-by-step plan to ease restrictions in England.
With regard to the reopening of the hospitality sector, Step 2 will take place no earlier than 12 April, when hospitality venues will be able to open for outdoor service, with no requirement for a substantial meal to be served alongside alcoholic drinks, and no curfew. The requirement to order, eat and drink while seated (‘table service’) will remain.
I should be very happy to meet with the hon. Member for the Isle of Wight and representatives of Solent LEP, by teleconference, to discuss the future of the MHI Vestas’ site. My office will be in touch to arrange a suitable date.
As set out in the government’s Tourism Recovery Plan, we are committed to supporting the tourism industry’s return to pre-pandemic levels across England including the Isle of Wight and other coastal communities.
So far, the government has provided over £35 billion in support to the tourism, leisure and hospitality sectors over the course of the pandemic in the form of grants, loans and tax breaks.
The latest budget announcement also included a new temporary business rates relief for over 90% of eligible retail, hospitality and leisure businesses in England which will cut at least 50% off their business rates bills during the 2022-23 period which is worth almost £1.7 billion.
On 21 December 2021, HMT announced additional support for businesses who have been impacted by the Omicron variant across the UK, including one-off grants of up to £6,000 for hospitality and leisure premises, plus more than £100 million discretionary funding will be made available for local authorities to support other businesses.
VisitBritain (VB) promotes Isle of Wight and other coastal destinations on their websites, social media and through PR activity to ensure that when international travel resumes, visitors are inspired and informed on visiting our coastal towns and cities.
Coastal destinations were also supported via the Discover England Fund as part of the England’s Coast project. This was up to 2021 however VisitBritain continues to support their initiatives, through marketing, PR and business support.
The Government is committed to promoting the arts and culture outside of London, and invests in culture across the country through Arts Council England.
Arts Council England’s ambition to ensure the arts are accessible to all is articulated in its ‘Let’s Create’ Strategy 2020-2030, which can be found on its website. The Arts Council encourages London-based organisations to have national reach and impact. It facilitates relationships across the country where there are synergies and/or particular opportunities, and supports organisations from major cities, including London, to share their work in rural areas. In addition, the Arts Council has identified the Isle of Wight as a priority area for increased engagement and investment.
A number of London-based National Portfolio Organisations (NPOs) work in the Isle of Wight as well as rural and coastal areas. One example includes The Reading Agency, which produces programmes delivered by libraries across the country.
In reaching the final decision on high risk vendors, the Government took into consideration the full range of threats and risks informed by the technical and security expertise of the UK’s intelligence community, led by the National Cyber Security Centre, together with all relevant information, both public and classified, including that from international partners.
The government’s decision to categorise Huawei as a high risk vendor takes into consideration the potential links between Chinese companies and the Chinese State. And the limits we have imposed on the presence of all High Risk Vendors constitute some of the toughest security measures in the telecoms sector in the world.
We have unique insight through the Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre (HCSEC), which was established in 2010. As a result of our work, we know more about Huawei, and the risks it poses, than any other country in the world. Huawei’s operations in the UK are subject to the strongest oversight possible. The company’s presence in the UK has been subject to detailed, formal oversight through the HCSEC, and the HCSEC Oversight Board which has reported annually since 2014.
As set out in the oral statement of 28 January by the Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, a high risk vendor is a vendor that poses greater security and resilience risks to UK telecoms. That statement also provided details of the non-exhaustive set of objective factors that were taken account of to assess a vendor as high risk. This set of factors has been further elaborated on in the National Cyber Security Centre’s advice on the use of equipment from high risk vendors in UK telecoms networks that was also published on 28 January and can be found on their website.
The NCSC also published a summary of the security analysis for the UK telecoms sector that informed the conclusions of the Government’s Telecoms Supply Chain Review. The summary notes that sensitive networks either route or have access to sensitive information, and include those directly relating to the operation of government or any safety-related systems and in wider critical national infrastructure. The summary of NCSC’s analysis can be found at: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/report/summary-of-ncsc-security-analysis-for-the-uk-telecoms-sector.
As set out in the oral statement of 28 January by the Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, a high risk vendor is a vendor that poses greater security and resilience risks to UK telecoms. That statement also provided details of the non-exhaustive set of objective factors that were taken account of to assess a vendor as high risk. This set of factors has been further elaborated on in the National Cyber Security Centre’s advice on the use of equipment from high risk vendors in UK telecoms networks that was also published on 28 January and can be found on their website.
The NCSC also published a summary of the security analysis for the UK telecoms sector that informed the conclusions of the Government’s Telecoms Supply Chain Review. The summary notes that sensitive networks either route or have access to sensitive information, and include those directly relating to the operation of government or any safety-related systems and in wider critical national infrastructure. The summary of NCSC’s analysis can be found at: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/report/summary-of-ncsc-security-analysis-for-the-uk-telecoms-sector.
The Government has complete confidence in the independent technical assessment of the UK’s security experts. The security analysis conducted by the National Cyber Security Centre underpinned the final conclusions of the Government’s Telecoms Supply Chain Review.
NCSC published a summary of its security analysis which informed the conclusions of the Review. This analysis includes a summary of NCSC’s assessment of the distinction between the ‘core’ and ‘edge’ of the network under section 8.3.1. The analysis states that:
“In 5G networks, core functions can be relocated nearer the ‘edge’ of the network. This has been described as blurring the line between core and edge. This is technically inaccurate as the ‘core’ is defined by a set of functions, standardised within [5], rather than a location. Consequently, the distinction between the two remains clear, as does the advice above. Our advice remains that HRVs are excluded from performing core functions, and this applies whether these functions are deployed centrally or towards the ‘edge’. Our understanding is that this clarification is unlikely to be consequential in the UK, as we are informed that core functions may run near the edge, but not actually on edge access equipment (such as base stations).”
The summary of NCSC’s security analysis can be found at: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/report/summary-of-ncsc-security-analysis-for-the-uk-telecoms-sector.
In reaching the final decision on high risk vendors, the UK Government took into consideration the full range of risks, including in relation to malicious code or programming errors.
Huawei’s presence in the UK has been subject to detailed, formal oversight through the Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre (HCSEC), and we remain confident in these arrangements. However the Government recognises that HCSEC alone cannot mitigate all the risks, and that is why the final conclusions of the Telecoms Supply Chain Review - as announced on 28 January - set out the additional controls that should be applied to high risk vendors.
The Telecoms Supply Chain Review included an international workstream to take account of the range of international positions so that they could be factored into UK decision-making.
In reaching the final decision on high risk vendors, the Government took into consideration the full range of threats and risks informed by the technical and security expertise of the UK’s intelligence community, led by the National Cyber Security Centre, together with all relevant information, both public and classified, including that from partners.
The Telecoms Supply Chain Review included an international workstream to take account of the range of international positions so that they could be factored into UK decision-making.
In reaching the final decision on high risk vendors, the Government took into consideration the full range of threats and risks informed by the technical and security expertise of the UK’s intelligence community, led by the National Cyber Security Centre, together with all relevant information, both public and classified, including that from partners.
The Telecoms Supply Chain Review included an international workstream to take account of the range of international positions so that they could be factored into UK decision-making.
In reaching the final decision on high risk vendors, the Government took into consideration the full range of threats and risks informed by the technical and security expertise of the UK’s intelligence community, led by the National Cyber Security Centre, together with all relevant information, both public and classified, including that from partners.
The Government has complete confidence in the independent technical assessment of the UK’s security experts. The security analysis conducted by the National Cyber Security Centre underpinned the final conclusions of the Government’s Telecoms Supply Chain Review.
NCSC published a summary of its security analysis which informed the conclusions of the Review. This analysis includes a summary of NCSC’s assessment of the distinction between the ‘core’ and ‘edge’ of the network under section 8.3.1. The analysis states that:
“In 5G networks, core functions can be relocated nearer the ‘edge’ of the network. This has been described as blurring the line between core and edge. This is technically inaccurate as the ‘core’ is defined by a set of functions, standardised within [5], rather than a location. Consequently, the distinction between the two remains clear, as does the advice above. Our advice remains that HRVs are excluded from performing core functions, and this applies whether these functions are deployed centrally or towards the ‘edge’. Our understanding is that this clarification is unlikely to be consequential in the UK, as we are informed that core functions may run near the edge, but not actually on edge access equipment (such as base stations).”
The summary of NCSC’s security analysis can be found at: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/report/summary-of-ncsc-security-analysis-for-the-uk-telecoms-sector.
In reaching the final decision on high risk vendors, the UK Government took into consideration the full range of risks, including in relation to malicious code or programming errors.
Huawei’s presence in the UK has been subject to detailed, formal oversight through the Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre (HCSEC), and we remain confident in these arrangements. However the Government recognises that HCSEC alone cannot mitigate all the risks, and that is why the final conclusions of the Telecoms Supply Chain Review - as announced on 28 January - set out the additional controls that should be applied to high risk vendors.
The Telecoms Supply Chain Review included an international workstream to take account of the range of international positions so that they could be factored into UK decision-making.
In reaching the final decision on high risk vendors, the Government took into consideration the full range of threats and risks informed by the technical and security expertise of the UK’s intelligence community, led by the National Cyber Security Centre, together with all relevant information, both public and classified, including that from partners.
The Government has complete confidence in the independent technical assessment of the UK’s security experts. The security analysis conducted by the National Cyber Security Centre underpinned the final conclusions of the Government’s Telecoms Supply Chain Review.
NCSC published a summary of its security analysis which informed the conclusions of the Review. This analysis includes a summary of NCSC’s assessment of the distinction between the ‘core’ and ‘edge’ of the network under section 8.3.1. The analysis states that:
“In 5G networks, core functions can be relocated nearer the ‘edge’ of the network. This has been described as blurring the line between core and edge. This is technically inaccurate as the ‘core’ is defined by a set of functions, standardised within [5], rather than a location. Consequently, the distinction between the two remains clear, as does the advice above. Our advice remains that HRVs are excluded from performing core functions, and this applies whether these functions are deployed centrally or towards the ‘edge’. Our understanding is that this clarification is unlikely to be consequential in the UK, as we are informed that core functions may run near the edge, but not actually on edge access equipment (such as base stations).”
The summary of NCSC’s security analysis can be found at: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/report/summary-of-ncsc-security-analysis-for-the-uk-telecoms-sector.
In reaching the final decision on high risk vendors, the UK Government took into consideration the full range of risks, including in relation to malicious code or programming errors.
Huawei’s presence in the UK has been subject to detailed, formal oversight through the Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre (HCSEC), and we remain confident in these arrangements. However the Government recognises that HCSEC alone cannot mitigate all the risks, and that is why the final conclusions of the Telecoms Supply Chain Review - as announced on 28 January - set out the additional controls that should be applied to high risk vendors.
The Government has complete confidence in the independent technical assessment of the UK’s security experts. The security analysis conducted by the National Cyber Security Centre underpinned the final conclusions of the Government’s Telecoms Supply Chain Review.
NCSC published a summary of its security analysis which informed the conclusions of the Review. This analysis includes a summary of NCSC’s assessment of the distinction between the ‘core’ and ‘edge’ of the network under section 8.3.1. The analysis states that:
“In 5G networks, core functions can be relocated nearer the ‘edge’ of the network. This has been described as blurring the line between core and edge. This is technically inaccurate as the ‘core’ is defined by a set of functions, standardised within [5], rather than a location. Consequently, the distinction between the two remains clear, as does the advice above. Our advice remains that HRVs are excluded from performing core functions, and this applies whether these functions are deployed centrally or towards the ‘edge’. Our understanding is that this clarification is unlikely to be consequential in the UK, as we are informed that core functions may run near the edge, but not actually on edge access equipment (such as base stations).”
The summary of NCSC’s security analysis can be found at: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/report/summary-of-ncsc-security-analysis-for-the-uk-telecoms-sector.
In reaching the final decision on high risk vendors, the UK Government took into consideration the full range of risks, including in relation to malicious code or programming errors.
Huawei’s presence in the UK has been subject to detailed, formal oversight through the Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre (HCSEC), and we remain confident in these arrangements. However the Government recognises that HCSEC alone cannot mitigate all the risks, and that is why the final conclusions of the Telecoms Supply Chain Review - as announced on 28 January - set out the additional controls that should be applied to high risk vendors.
The Government has complete confidence in the independent technical assessment of the UK’s security experts. The security analysis conducted by the National Cyber Security Centre underpinned the final conclusions of the Government’s Telecoms Supply Chain Review.
NCSC published a summary of its security analysis which informed the conclusions of the Review. This analysis includes a summary of NCSC’s assessment of the distinction between the ‘core’ and ‘edge’ of the network under section 8.3.1. The analysis states that:
“In 5G networks, core functions can be relocated nearer the ‘edge’ of the network. This has been described as blurring the line between core and edge. This is technically inaccurate as the ‘core’ is defined by a set of functions, standardised within [5], rather than a location. Consequently, the distinction between the two remains clear, as does the advice above. Our advice remains that HRVs are excluded from performing core functions, and this applies whether these functions are deployed centrally or towards the ‘edge’. Our understanding is that this clarification is unlikely to be consequential in the UK, as we are informed that core functions may run near the edge, but not actually on edge access equipment (such as base stations).”
The summary of NCSC’s security analysis can be found at: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/report/summary-of-ncsc-security-analysis-for-the-uk-telecoms-sector.
In reaching the final decision on high risk vendors, the UK Government took into consideration the full range of risks, including in relation to malicious code or programming errors.
Huawei’s presence in the UK has been subject to detailed, formal oversight through the Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre (HCSEC), and we remain confident in these arrangements. However the Government recognises that HCSEC alone cannot mitigate all the risks, and that is why the final conclusions of the Telecoms Supply Chain Review - as announced on 28 January - set out the additional controls that should be applied to high risk vendors.
The UK has been vocal in drawing attention to the systematic human rights violations against Uyghur Muslims and other ethnic minorities in China. Ministers and senior officials regularly raise our concerns both directly with the Chinese and multilaterally. On 29 October, at the UN Third Committee, the UK read out a joint statement, on behalf of 22 other countries, drawing attention to the human rights violations in Xinjiang and calling on China to uphold its obligations to respect human rights. The UK also co-hosted an event on Xinjiang during the UN General Assembly in September.
The Government has also set out its expectations of businesses in the UK National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights and continues to encourage all British businesses to undertake appropriate levels of due diligence before deciding to do business or invest in foreign companies. The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights advises UK companies to respect human rights wherever they operate including adopting appropriate due diligence policies to identify, prevent and mitigate human rights risks, and commit to monitoring and evaluating implementation
The department is making significant investments to support the recruitment and retention of high-quality teachers. The Spending Review 2021 made an extra £1.6 billion available for 16-19 education in the 2024/25 financial year, compared with 2021/22. We are investing £125 million of available funds in the 2023/24 financial year for 16-19 education to increase the national funding rate by 2.2% from £4,542 to £4,642, and boost specific programme cost weightings by 10%, to support the additional costs of recruiting and retaining teachers in construction, manufacturing, engineering, and digital subject areas.
The department is supporting teacher recruitment in the sector through a national campaign to encourage industry professionals to become further education (FE) teachers. We have supported the creation of new, high-quality routes into FE teaching, including a revised Level 5 Learning and Skills Teacher apprenticeship for those planning to work in the FE sector. We are providing bursaries worth up to £29,000 each, tax free, to support FE teacher training in priority subject areas for the 2023/24 academic year.
Our Taking Teaching Further (TTF) programme has supported around 1,000 people to retrain as FE teachers since it launched in 2018. In addition, the department is piloting a new £6,000 financial incentive for TTF recruits teaching in some of the most hard-to-fill subject areas, including digital, construction and the built environment, engineering and manufacturing, and maths.
The information is not readily available and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
The information is not readily available and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
The information is not readily available and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
In 2018, the Department launched the £26.3 million English Hubs Programme, which is dedicated to improving the teaching of reading, with a focus on supporting children making the slowest progress in reading, many of whom come from disadvantaged backgrounds.
The 34 English Hubs in the programme are primary schools which are outstanding at teaching early reading. A further £17 million has been allocated for this school to school improvement programme, which focusses on systematic synthetic phonics, early language, and reading for pleasure.
Schools on the Isle of Wight may contact their nearest English Hub, Springhill Catholic Primary, if they wish to receive funding support for phonics. The hub has, so far, recruited one partner school on the Isle of Wight and is actively reaching out to other eligible schools, including planning an Isle of Wight specific engagement event in the coming term.
The department is revitalising the technical education system by introducing T Levels that are backed and designed by employers to get people into skilled work and further training. T Levels are at the centre of our long-term reforms to technical education, building on the recommendations in the Sainsbury Report, published in 2016. Alongside the introduction of T Levels, the department is reviewing post-16 qualifications at level 3 and below. We have withdrawn funding approval for more than 5,000 qualifications that had no or low enrolments. The next phase of our reforms is to remove qualifications that overlap with T Levels for 16 to 19 year olds, which will reduce complexity for young people and employers.
The department is also reviewing the qualifications that sit alongside A levels and T Levels at level 3 and below. Our reforms will ensure that all students have confidence that every qualification is a high-quality option, and that it supports their progression to employment or further study, including higher education.
Funding for schools in the Isle of Wight, through the dedicated schools grant (DSG) and the indicative figures for the schools’ supplementary grant for mainstream schools combined, is forecast to rise by £4 million in the 2022-23 financial year, an increase of 6.0% per pupil. This per pupil funding increase excludes ‘growth’ funding, which is additional funding, provided for schools seeing significant increases in pupil numbers. This takes total funding for the 2022-23 financial year in the Isle of Wight to over £83.2 million.
On top of this funding, over £100 million of funding will be made available to support Education Investment Areas, including the Isle of Wight.
The table below shows the funding per pupil in the Isle of Wight, compared to the national average:
Year | Funding per pupil in the Isle of Wight | National average funding per pupil |
2017-18 | £4,526 | £4,619 |
2018-19 | £4,542 | £4,630 |
2019-20 | £4,561 | £4,650 |
2020-21 | £4,740 | £4,845 |
2021-22 | £5,097 | £5,228 |
2022-23 | £5,401 | £5,531 |
The funding per pupil from the financial years 2017-18 to 2022-23 is through the DSG (actual funding received) but from the 2019-20 financial year onwards, excludes growth funding. To note, in the 2021-22 financial year, the funding per pupil includes the teachers’ pay and pensions grant that was rolled into the national funding formula (NFF) and for the 2022-23 financial year, additional funding from the supplementary grant is included into the funding per pupil figure.
Funding per pupil for the Isle of Wight has been lower than the national average because the NFF directs resources to schools with more pupils with additional needs, such as those indicated by measures of deprivation, low prior attainment, or English as an additional language, to help them meet the needs of all their pupils. In addition, schools in more expensive areas, like London, attract higher funding per pupil than other parts of the country to reflect the higher costs they face. This also affects the national average funding per pupil figures in the table above.
Funding for schools in the Isle of Wight, through the dedicated schools grant (DSG) and the indicative figures for the schools’ supplementary grant for mainstream schools combined, is forecast to rise by £4 million in the 2022-23 financial year, an increase of 6.0% per pupil. This per pupil funding increase excludes ‘growth’ funding, which is additional funding, provided for schools seeing significant increases in pupil numbers. This takes total funding for the 2022-23 financial year in the Isle of Wight to over £83.2 million.
On top of this funding, over £100 million of funding will be made available to support Education Investment Areas, including the Isle of Wight.
The table below shows the funding per pupil in the Isle of Wight, compared to the national average:
Year | Funding per pupil in the Isle of Wight | National average funding per pupil |
2017-18 | £4,526 | £4,619 |
2018-19 | £4,542 | £4,630 |
2019-20 | £4,561 | £4,650 |
2020-21 | £4,740 | £4,845 |
2021-22 | £5,097 | £5,228 |
2022-23 | £5,401 | £5,531 |
The funding per pupil from the financial years 2017-18 to 2022-23 is through the DSG (actual funding received) but from the 2019-20 financial year onwards, excludes growth funding. To note, in the 2021-22 financial year, the funding per pupil includes the teachers’ pay and pensions grant that was rolled into the national funding formula (NFF) and for the 2022-23 financial year, additional funding from the supplementary grant is included into the funding per pupil figure.
Funding per pupil for the Isle of Wight has been lower than the national average because the NFF directs resources to schools with more pupils with additional needs, such as those indicated by measures of deprivation, low prior attainment, or English as an additional language, to help them meet the needs of all their pupils. In addition, schools in more expensive areas, like London, attract higher funding per pupil than other parts of the country to reflect the higher costs they face. This also affects the national average funding per pupil figures in the table above.
Overall absence data is collected in the termly school census collection and figures for January 2022 are not yet available at this time. Full year figures for the 2020/21 academic year will be available from 24 March 2022, including by amount of absence.
The department currently publishes on-site attendance and COVID-19-related absence data at a national level on a fortnightly basis and at a local authority level on a half-termly basis. Data covering 31 January 2022 will be published routinely, on this basis.
The latest published local authority level data ends in Week 50 2021. During the 2021 autumn term, at a national level, on average 89.8% of pupils were in attendance on-site and 2.3% were absent for COVID-19-related reasons. Over the same period, on the Isle of Wight, 88.5% of pupils were in attendance on-site and 2.9% were absent for COVID-19-related reasons.
The full most recent national, regional and local authority data can be found here: https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/attendance-in-education-and-early-years-settings-during-the-coronavirus-covid-19-outbreak.
National level pupil data can be found in Table 1B of the underlying data files, whilst local authority data can be found in Table 1C.
The daily education settings survey asks schools and colleges to report data such as on-site attendance and COVID-19 absence.
The most recent published data at national level is 20 January 2022 and can be found here: https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/attendance-in-education-and-early-years-settings-during-the-coronavirus-covid-19-outbreak.
It is more crucial than ever before that we tap into the brilliant talent that our country has to offer, and make sure that university places are available to all who are qualified by ability and attainment to pursue them, and who wish to do so.
It was announced in December 2021 that a proposal led by Solent University, in collaboration with the Isle of Wight College amongst others, has been successful in the government’s £120 million competition to establish the next wave of innovative new Institutes of Technology across the country, offering higher technical STEM education and training mainly at levels 4 and 5.
Although there are no immediate plans to expand the provision of higher education to other isolated areas and island communities, this government is committed to a sustainable funding model that supports high-quality provision, which meets the skills needs of the country and maintains the world-class reputation of UK higher education.
Tackling marine plastic pollution in all its forms is a priority for the UK Government, and we’re taking action domestically, regionally and internationally to address this issue.
Our statutory UK Marine Strategy sets out a vision for UK waters to achieve clean, safe, healthy biologically diverse and productive seas, which are used sustainably. The UK Marine Strategy Part One set out our aim for the amount of litter on coastlines and in the marine environment to be declining over time and for levels to not pose a significant risk to the coastal and marine environment.
In 2019, the British Irish Council Ministers recognised the need to address the loss of plastic pellets and supported the development of a Publicly Available Specification developed by the British Standards Institution. This Specification sets out requirements for the handling and management of plastic pellets, flakes and powders throughout the supply chain to prevent spills, leaks and loss to the environment, and was the first of its kind when published in July 2021. Details can be found on the BSI website: PAS 510:2021 | 31 Jul 2021 | BSI Knowledge (bsigroup.com).
As a Contracting Party to the OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic, the UK develops and implements actions under the OSPAR Regional Action Plan on Marine Litter and has led an action on preventing plastic pellet loss in the supply chain. The action has resulted in the adoption of a Recommendation on minimum requirements for pellet loss certification schemes, to promote coherence in national approaches and drive improved standards throughout the supply chain.
The UK is a leading voice in the negotiation of a new international treaty on plastic pollution and has called for binding provisions to reduce and prevent microplastic pollution from all sources. In particular, the UK has called for specific provisions to prevent and eliminate emissions and releases of plastic pellets, flakes and powders across the whole supply chain.
Additionally, the UK is contributing to discussions at the International Maritime Organisation regarding requirements for the shipping of plastic pellets. Recommendations on the carriage of plastic pellets by sea in freight containers are under development and are expected to be approved this year. The UK is pushing for action to be taken as soon as possible to reduce the incidence of plastic pellet spills at sea.
Any application for a licence to release beaver would need to make an assessment of the potential impact on the environment and local economic interests as part of the application process and in accordance with the Code for Reintroductions. Natural England undertook an assessment, published in 2021, of the findings from the River Otter trial in Devon, which is the only licenced wild release of beavers in England.
We are continuing to undertake further work with Natural England to develop our approach to the reintroduction of beaver in England.
We have recently set out in our Environmental Improvement Plan that we will protect our protected landscapes by investing in a new National Landscapes Partnership, developing a Protected Landscapes outcomes framework, providing guidance to strengthen Protected Landscapes’ management plans and issuing guidance on the strengthened biodiversity duty. We will extend our protected landscapes by continuing assessments to designate two new AONBs and two AONB extensions and using the All-England mapping tool to identify landscapes to improve nature and access.
Under section 3 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, it is an offence to allow any dog to be dangerously out of control.
In December 2021, Defra published research in collaboration with Middlesex University investigating measures to reduce dog attacks and promote responsible dog ownership across all breeds of dog. In response to this research, we have established a Responsible Dog Ownership working group involving police, local authorities and animal welfare organisations. Conclusions and policy reform recommendations are expected later this year.
Under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (England) Regulations 2018, licensed dog breeders must take all reasonable steps to check that the dogs used for breeding have a good temperament, and must implement and be able to demonstrate the use of a socialisation and habituation programme for the puppies.
When kept privately as pets, pure servals require a licence under Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976. While the focus of the 1976 Act is public safety, licensing conditions also provide for animal welfare protections, such as the provision of accommodation that is a suitable size, temperature and cleanliness, as well as providing adequate and suitable food, drink and bedding material. Whether a serval hybrid would require a licence under the 1976 Act would depend on the generation of the cat. When the list of species which require a licence under the 1976 Act was last amended in 2007 it sought to clarify the position for domestic cat x wild cat hybrids generally. The immediate offspring of a pure serval and a domestic cat would require a licence, but subsequent hybrids from this source would not.
Where a serval was kept and exhibited to the public for seven days or more a year (otherwise than in a circus or pet shop), rather than a licence under the 1976 Act, they would need to be licensed and inspected under the Zoo Licensing Act 1981. Under the 1981 Act, zoos are required to meet strict obligations in relation to animal welfare, conservation, and education. The animal welfare requirements are set in the Secretary of State's Standards of Modern Zoo Practice. The standards are currently under review following a 16 week consultation that ended on Tuesday 21 st June.
The commercial sale of cats, including servals, as pets is regulated under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (England) Regulations 2018. The 2018 Regulations set out clear requirements for those who sell cats commercially. Licencees must meet strict statutory minimum welfare standards which are enforced by local authorities who have powers to issue, refuse or revoke licences.
Further to these specific protections, these animals are also protected under the Animal Welfare Act 2006. The 2006 Act requires those in charge of animals to protect them from harm and to ensure their key welfare needs are provided for. Those in charge of animals who fail to protect them from harm, or fail to provide for their welfare needs may be prosecuted and face penalties including a custodial sentence or an unlimited fine, or both.
The Government supports a competitive agri-food supply chain that provides opportunities for all businesses, including farmers, processors and abattoirs. We are working across government, with industry and stakeholders to ensure that the UK maintains its high-quality slaughtering facilities within a robust and competitive market providing options for farmers particularly in rural and isolated communities and reducing animal welfare impacts.
The Food Standards Agency is working closely with a business in England who are looking to introduce a mobile slaughter unit which will service local suppliers and support the rural economy. If this model can meet regulatory requirements and is deemed viable it could be replicated in other parts of the country where facilities for slaughter are in decline.
The Government is committed to levelling up areas across the country. UK Freeports, like Solent, are fantastic places for businesses to grow, innovate and collaborate. They are capitalising on Freeport tax, customs, and planning benefits, and the region’s clean energy and maritime opportunities, to develop as national hubs for trade and global investment. These benefits remain unchanged by Investment Zones.
While the Government is still considering our approach to Investment Zones, we are grateful for the Expressions of Interest submitted, which officials are assessing. The Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities will confirm next steps in due course.