(1 week ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. I commend the hon. Member for Burton and Uttoxeter (Jacob Collier) for his eloquent and emotionally intelligent speech. Just over a year ago, the campaign group The Dad Shift came the Parliament. I was grilled by teachers and students from Europa School in my Oxfordshire constituency about my support for better paternity leave and pay. They told me that, at two weeks off at less than half the minimum wage, the UK is among the worst in Europe for provision. That is unacceptable, so it is welcome that the Government’s parental leave and pay review’s objectives include ensuring
“sufficient resources and time away from work to support new and expectant parents’ wellbeing”
and supporting
“parents to make balanced childcare choices that work for their family”.
Dr Roz Savage (South Cotswolds) (LD)
I have heard from many parents in the South Cotswolds whose recent experiences do not fit neatly into the Government’s model of pregnancy. Whether it is having twins, post-natal depression or managing debt, every family’s situation is different. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government’s current system lacks the flexibility to accommodate these different circumstances, and that that needs to be addressed in the review?
Olly Glover
My hon. Friend makes the very liberal point that we should always remember that everyone’s individual and family circumstances are different; it is important that the British state recognises that individuality, rather than expecting everyone to fit on a convenient spreadsheet.
To make some of the needed improvements, both the rate at which paternity pay is paid and the length of leave must be addressed. Currently, fathers and non-birthing parents are not supported to take time off from work because they cannot afford to do so. A large number of constituents have written to me on this topic. I am sure that many more, who have not had the time to consider writing to me, are also deeply affected by this, as shown by the large number of signatories to the petition that has triggered this debate.
Let me repeat some of the points made to me by my constituents. The low rate of statutory pay for both parents has huge financial implications for new parents, especially those in single-income households. Living on so little during one of the most vulnerable periods of their lives is a significant issue.
Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)
The Government’s stated first objective in this review is to support the physical and mental health of women after they have given birth to a child. One cannot overestimate the amount of mental stress caused by living in poverty or without enough resources for one’s family. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Liberal Democrat policy to double statutory shared parental pay to £350 a week is the right move?
Olly Glover
That is one of many excellent Liberal Democrat measures that we have proposed. My hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) will tell us more about that, and I do not want to steal too much more of her thunder.
Polling for The Dad Shift and Movember has found that the financial pressure is wrecking the health of new parents and their families, with more than half of new dads reporting mental and physical health consequences. Some 61% become less present with their families, and 57% are put off having more children. Although we in the Liberal Democrats may not be able to go quite as far as is asked for in this e-petition, we nevertheless support a number of significant changes. My hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park will say a lot more.
I remind Members to please stick to the informal time limit. If they do not, I will have to make it a formal time limit.
(10 months, 3 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Mark.
I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing the debate. Her speech covered a lot of ground, and she paid warm tribute to campaigners in her constituency and beyond. She told the story, with great eloquence, of the journey that is still in progress on disability rights. I remember her speaking with passion about the subject in her maiden speech, too.
The hon. Lady also spoke of the need to promote equality of access, and cited examples of how positive change in the workplace can be achieved through the right supportive schemes. She and other Members also mentioned the importance of the links with education and transport, reminding us that this issue cuts across all aspects of government and society. She was right to call on the Government to focus on support and positive action rather than sanctions and punishment.
The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) talked about the importance of supporting and encouraging people into work and gave the Northern Ireland context. He rightly reminded us that not all disabilities are visible. The hon. Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes) spoke of the importance of support for carers and of high-quality transport to enable people to access society equally.
The hon. Member for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton (Alison Griffiths) was right to cite the then Conservative Government’s contribution in the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. Hopefully we can all work together across the House to continue to reduce, and ultimately end, discrimination against disabled people, including in the workplace.
We must do far more to tackle barriers to work, including by providing more support for employers to change the way they view disability. In the Liberal Democrats’ manifesto, we committed to make the benefits system work better for disabled people by giving them, and organisations that represent them, a stronger voice in the design of benefit policies and processes. We would like work capability assessments to be brought in-house and personal independence payment assessments to be reformed to make the process more transparent and stop unnecessary reassessments and the use of informal assessments. We would also like to empower more people to enter the job market, including parents, carers and disabled people themselves, by making more use of technology and new ways of working.
We welcome the Government’s long-term ambition to achieve an 80% employment rate, and a number of measures in their “Get Britain Working” White Paper published last month. Under the Conservative Government, the UK was the only economy to see its employment rate fall over the past five years, and they undermined apprenticeships, left mental health services not fit for purpose and ran our NHS into the ground.
We welcome the Government’s proposed steps to improve access to skills, training and education and to reduce shockingly high mental health care waiting lists. However, we call on them to go further. We would like to see regular mental health check-ups made available and new mental health hubs in all communities. We would like to see more done on providing better flexible working, given that 52% of carers who apply for it have their application refused. The Government should guarantee that apprentices are paid at least the national minimum wage by scrapping the lower apprentice rate. I also note that disability charities such as Disability Rights UK have some concern about the balance between positive, supportive measures, and potential sanctions and punishment, in forthcoming legislation.
We have heard from many hon. Members about the importance of local charities and about particular constituency circumstances. More than 12,000 households in my Oxfordshire constituency of Didcot and Wantage include at least one disabled person, which represents nearly 28% of all households in the constituency. Thankfully, local authorities and charities work together to help provide assistance. Oxfordshire county council runs a community support service—hosted in the towns of Wantage and Wallingford—with activities and services to help people stay healthy, independent and engaged. As the years have moved on, the service in Wantage has adapted to meet the changing social care needs of the area. Wantage market garden was created in the green space behind the service and is now looked after by the community action group Sustainable Wantage, in partnership with care provider Style Acre and the county council. Services like these are vital for the inclusion and support of disabled people.
We know that on average, disabled people take far fewer trips per year than non-disabled people, which is why, in addition to improving bus and rail services, community transport services such as Vale Community Impact, Cholsey Volunteers, Didcot Volunteer Drivers and Wallingford Volunteer Drivers, are such an important lifeline. I am proud that Oxfordshire county council has awarded over £100,000 of grants to those organisations. Most railway stations in my constituency have seen accessibility improvements in recent times, but Cholsey is the busiest that currently lacks them. I call on Network Rail, Great Western Railway and the Government to support an accessibility scheme at that station.
We have heard from the hon. Members for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) and for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley) about the importance of helping and supporting people with hearing loss. At the risk of oversharing, I am also afflicted by occasional earwax problems, so can certainly recognise that point. Perhaps I shall turn to the hon. Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket for advice on how to deal with that vexing problem.
In conclusion, we must do more to support those with additional needs. I hear regularly from my constituents that accessing the support they need through personal independence applications is challenging to say the least. We must support employers to make reasonable adjustments for employees through schemes like Access to Work and, as the hon. Member for Strangford said, support children with special educational needs so that they can thrive in their education. We must also provide more funding for CAMHS, the child and adolescent mental health services. I look forward to hearing what the Minister has to say.
(1 year ago)
Commons Chamber
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)
I commend my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey) for introducing this debate. I echo his call for an end to unfair overpayment claims as a result of the earnings limit, and for a comprehensive review of support for carers. I will now share some stories about carers who I have met over the years, or who are in my constituency.
As a volunteer for the Motor Neurone Disease Association, I have seen the toll that that terrible disease takes on families and their carers. Many of the people who get MND are elderly and they see their lives change from a relaxing retirement with their partner after many years of work to one person having MND and their spouse becoming a carer. That is very challenging for people who have led self-sufficient lives and lose their mobility and independence.
It is also important, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stratford-on-Avon (Manuela Perteghella) said, that we consider the experiences of the next generation of carers. Sometimes motor neurone disease can affect much younger people. One person I supported was a single parent with a four-year-old child. I saw the impact that caring responsibilities can have on children and young carers; even where really good care arrangements are in place, there is still the physical and emotional toll of being an unpaid carer.
In Oxfordshire we have 12,000 young carers; the Be Free Young Carers charity supports around 650 of them. It has been estimated that families that have a young carer earn £5,000 more than those who do not have a young carer, but while contributing huge economic benefit, young carers are one and a half times more likely to have a long-term illness or special educational needs.
A child I am calling Katie registered with Be Free Young Carers in March 2023. She cares for her twin sister, who has autism. In April 2023, Katie attended a one-to-one session that enabled her to open up about how she was feeling and the support she needed to continue her schoolwork. Later that year, Katie’s dad was diagnosed with MS, which added further pressure and led Katie’s sister to try to take her own life. After such a series of events many children would have struggled, but Katie has coped and is doing well. She has attended 13 respite trips over the past two years, including the young carers’ festival, and has a lovely group of friends. She is also a member of the charity’s youth panel. She has spoken about the Be Free Young Carers charity on local television news.
It is vital that we support all carers, including young carers such as Katie. I commend the motion to the House.
(1 year ago)
Commons ChamberMy hon. Friend is an absolute expert on this kind of inclusive change that we need to make to our employment support system so that we can help everybody, and I look forward to working with her on ideas just like that when we bring forward our White Paper in the autumn.
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)
I thank the hon. Member for his question. I have looked into this issue, which has a long and complex history, and I would be very willing to meet him to discuss it in more detail.