Alison Bennett MP: speeches

Speeches

• 20 Oct 2025 · International Baccalaureate · Hansard source

  More

  1. What steps she is taking to ensure the provision of adequate funding for pupils to study the International Baccalaureate.

• 20 Oct 2025 · International Baccalaureate · Hansard source

  More

  Varndean sixth-form college in Brighton is the only state-funded IB provider in Sussex. It has warned that, without the large programme uplift, the IB will become financially unviable. Many Mid Sussex students have gone on from Varndean to study engineering, medicine and maths at leading universities. Does the Minister think it right that this world-class qualification becomes available only in the private sector, entrenching a two-tier education system? Will he meet me and Varndean students to discuss the benefits of the IB for state-educated pupils and why this decision must be reversed?

• 16 Oct 2025 · Children’s Hospices: South-east England · Hansard source

  More

  I agree that increasing the time period covered by this grant to children’s hospices to three years will really help. Can the Minister comment on whether there are plans to do the same for the adult hospice sector?

• 16 Oct 2025 · Children’s Hospices: South-east England · Hansard source

  More

  I wholeheartedly welcome the Government’s announcement this morning, in anticipation of this afternoon’s debate, of £80 million of support for children’s hospices over three years. I thank the Minister for listening to the calls of the children’s hospice sector and the Liberal Democrats. The three-year settlement will enable hospices to plan and deliver services over a longer period. Above all, it will ensure that seriously ill children and their families can continue to access hospice care. However, providers tell me that this level of funding does not solve the children’s hospice funding crisis, nor does it put children’s hospices on a genuinely long-term, sustainable financial footing. Bluntly, this funding will only slow the rate at which children’s hospice services are being cut. Across the south-east—indeed, across the whole of England—children’s hospices support thousands of seriously ill babies, children and young people, and the families who love and care for them. One such organisation is Shooting Star Children’s Hospices. A parent recent said: “Without the support of the team at Shooting Star I believe our family would be under enormous strain and feel unable to know where to turn.” They are places of compassion, expert medical care and human dignity. They provide everything from end-of-life care to vital symptom management and psychological support, but our children’s hospices are in crisis. Unless urgent action is taken, many may disappear. Since 2019, the number of children and young people needing end-of-life care has doubled. The demand for symptom management has surged by 108%. Hospices are having to provide more care and support than ever before, yet they are struggling to keep their doors open. At the same time, inflation and rising costs, particularly in recruiting and retaining highly skilled staff, has driven hospice expenditure up by an average of 15% in the past year alone. The Government’s disastrous national insurance hike has only exacerbated the existing pressures. For example, Southern Hospice Group is a local charity made up of three Sussex hospices: Chestnut Tree House children’s hospice near Arundel, Martlets in Hove and St Barnabas House in Worthing. The national insurance rise has collectively cost them £500,000. Yes, the Government have increased funding in cash terms, but it is simply not enough. Local NHS funding from integrated care boards remains 18% lower than it was three years ago, even as hospices stretch to meet rising demand. Children’s hospices are now dipping into their reserves to stay open. In 2024-25, 59% of them ended the year in deficit. In 2025-26, that figure is expected to rise to a staggering 91%. This is clearly not sustainable. Meanwhile, a postcode lottery in funding continues. Recent freedom of information requests conducted by the charity Together for Short Lives showed that some integrated care boards in London spent over £400 per child needing palliative care, while others spent less than £25. We see that too in the south-east: one ICB spent over £260 per child, while another spent just over £100. Only 32% of ICBs could even say how many children accessed hospice care in their region. This gap in data must be filled. The announcement this morning suggested that funding being distributed via ICBs would tackle the postcode lottery issue, but the results of these FOI requests suggest that there is an awfully long way to go. How will the Minister ensure that ICBs commission children’s hospice services equitably? What guidance will they be given to ensure that these vast variations in support are eliminated? If I can emphasise one thing, it is that people are the beating heart of the hospice movement. Highly qualified specialists, passionate volunteers and generous donors all make the seemingly impossible happen, but the work- force is in crisis. Incredibly, there are only 24 full-time equivalent paediatric palliative medicine specialists serving the entire UK, when we know the need is for at least 40 to 60. If we followed the guidelines of the Royal College of Nursing, we would have nearly 5,000 community children’s nurses; right now, we have under 1,000. The professionals who care for our sickest children are being stretched to breaking point. I urge the Minister and the Government to build on today’s announcement by first fixing the broken commissioning system. We must instruct NHS England and the Department to model what each local NHS body should be spending on palliative care and to hold them accountable. We must commission services at regional and national levels, where appropriate, to create economies of scale, and we must use the new pan-ICB commissioning offices to ensure consistent and equitable access to care across England. Secondly, we must tackle workforce shortages and invest an additional £2.4 million per year in GRID and SPIN training for paediatric palliative medicine. We must fund and implement safe staffing ratios for nurses and aim to employ the 4,960 community nurses that England truly needs.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Children’s Hospices: South-east England · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for celebrating the work of Queen’s nurses and fabulous Fia for what she has done in writing a book—I am not sure that I could do that. It is truly impressive, and I am happy to encourage the Minister to buy the book; it sounds like I had better buy it too. This is about real children like fabulous Fia. It is about real families and real suffering that could be eased. Children’s hospices provide £3.32 of care for every £1 invested by the state, which is extraordinary value, so they deserve more support. These children deserve dignity, comfort and skilled care, and their families deserve the support that only children’s hospices can offer.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Children’s Hospices: South-east England · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for the campaigning she is doing with her colleagues on Arthur Rank hospice in Cambridgeshire, and she is right. When I went to visit Chestnut Tree House in Sussex last week, I saw that it is talking to adult hospices in the area about where that more strategic view can happen. These children deserve dignity, comfort and skilled care, and their families deserve the support that only children’s hospices can offer. Will this Government truly support the vision laid out in the NHS 10-year plan in which neighbourhood health centres, hospitals and hospices work together to deliver high-quality end-of-life care in the community, or will we continue to let these vital services be ignored, underfunded and unconnected? There is an opportunity for more action than that in this morning’s announcement and for a longer-term commitment. I urge the Minister to do what is necessary and right and ensure that no child is left without the care and dignity that they deserve.

• 14 Oct 2025 · Mental Health Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

• 13 Oct 2025 · Baby Loss · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Members for Rossendale and Darwen (Andy MacNae) and for Sherwood Forest (Michelle Welsh) and the right hon. Member for Godalming and Ash (Sir Jeremy Hunt) must be thanked, not just for securing this debate to mark Baby Loss Awareness Week, but for their tireless advocacy to improve maternity services across the United Kingdom—work that they have been carrying out for many years. The pain of baby loss is multifaceted. It involves not only the unimaginable grief that accompanies losing a baby, but the emotional and psychological suffering that comes with facing the prospect of a life without your child—a future completely different from the one you had hoped for. Losing a baby can be loud, fast and chaotic, but it can also happen quietly—almost unnoticeably. Some parents arrive home from the hospital to a wardrobe full of baby clothes and piles of newborn toys, but an empty cot. Other expectant mothers may wake up in the morning excited to be another day closer to their baby’s arrival, only to find out that it was not meant to be. Half of adults in the UK said that they or someone they know had experienced pregnancy or baby loss. According to Sands, every day in the UK 13 babies die shortly before, during or soon after birth. These families, as we have heard tonight, have to try to pick up the pieces, maintain their relationships, work and continue with daily commitments, all while tackling the emotional and often physical trauma of their experiences. They often walk that path alone, feeling like there is nobody they can speak to about their indescribable grief, or that they should not speak about it, as though they themselves have somehow failed. That is not the case, and no woman should have to suffer in silence. In the case of my constituents, Hannah and Simon, not only did they have to come to terms with the fact that they would not be taking their baby boy, Austin, home from the hospital, but they had to face the reality that this tragedy was avoidable and that their baby would have survived, had the trust recognised and responded to concerns identified in the foetal and maternal monitoring. Hannah and Simon are not the only ones. Connecting with other parents in Sussex resulted in them hearing stories from other families whose experiences were concerningly similar to their own. Between 2019 and 2023, the University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust paid £58 million in compensation for 60 medical negligence claims related to maternity and obstetric care. That is the second-highest amount of compensation and the third-highest number of claims across all NHS trusts in England. That, and Hannah and Simon’s story, points to a larger systemic problem at the heart of maternity care. It was clear then, as it is now, that successive Governments have been asleep at the wheel on maternity care, and it is the families at the heart of it who pay the price—families such as Hannah and Simon’s. Their baby Austin would have been starting school next year if things had been different, and their daughter, just three when her little brother died, “should not have to continually ask us why her friends got to bring their siblings home, and she had to say goodbye instead.” That family, like too many across the country, deserved better. Now, they themselves are calling for change so that no one else misses out on a lifetime of memories with their child as a result of avoidable mistakes. As part of her inquiry into maternity care, Donna Ockenden provided a blueprint—a starting point from which we could put an end to this scandal, make maternity care fit for purpose and put an end to these unnecessary deaths. However, not only have the nationally applicable, immediate and essential actions of the Ockenden report not all been implemented, but the Government have dropped the requirement for every ICB to have a women’s health hub, and they have announced cuts to the national service development funding for maternity services from £95 million in 2024-25 to just £2 million the following year. Is it any wonder, therefore, that the UK is underperforming compared with other OECD countries on infant and newborn mortality, or that, according to a Care Quality Commission report in September 2024, 65% of units are not safe for women to give birth in? We want our country to become the safest place in the world to have a baby, but that can only be achieved if accountability is taken for these failings, lessons are learned, and concrete steps are taken by the Government to put an end to this national scandal. We have heard from a number of Members this evening about the impacts of deprivation and ethnicity on outcomes for maternity and for babies. The colour of someone’s skin, their bank balance or where they live should not be deciding factors in whether they and their baby live or die. Quite simply, maternity care should not be a lottery. I very much welcome the Secretary of State’s presence this evening, and I endorse the comments made by the right hon. Member for Melton and Syston (Edward Argar) and my hon. Friends the Members for Horsham (John Milne) and for Chichester (Jess Brown-Fuller), who said that families who have lost babies through medical negligence need to be taken with the Government on this journey towards reviews. I think that the Sussex families would be furious with me this evening if I did not say to the Secretary of State that they are not happy with the way in which the reviews announced in July are going so far, so I urge him to do everything in his power to listen to the families and take them on that journey together. Let me pose a question to the Secretary of State on behalf of Hannah and Simon. These Sussex families have waited over a year for the Government to appoint Donna Ockenden, the one person with a proven record of exposing failings and driving improvement. Thus far, their patience has been repaid with delay, confusion and avoidance. When will the Government act to stop these preventable deaths by appointing Donna Ockenden to lead the Sussex review, and by confronting what has become a national shame for our country’s children with a full public inquiry? My hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Bobby Dean) spoke movingly about his and his wife’s experience of miscarriage, and I endorse his call for mental health support following every miscarriage, not just after three.

• 13 Oct 2025 · Baby Loss · Hansard source

  More

  The theme of this year’s Baby Loss Awareness Week is “Together, we care”, and we do care. We care about all kinds of baby loss, and we care about babies like Austin. Hannah told me: “We lost an entire lifetime. Our son never had the chance to grow up, to take his first steps, to speak his first words, to make friends”—

• 16 Sept 2025 · Police: Professional Standards · Hansard source

  More

  I am an MP from Sussex. We are about to go through local government reorganisation and see the creation of a Sussex mayor, and as part of that process, the role of the police and crime commissioner is going to become redundant. How does the Minister think that new mayoral responsibility is going to work in practice? Is it going to be exactly the same as it currently stands with PCCs, or will it be different?

• 15 Sept 2025 · Children with SEND: Assessments and Support · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Huq. Parents do everything for their children, especially when they have special needs. That is why I am fed up with the demonisation of parents. They are blamed for gaming the system, for having failed as parents, for being too soft, for not putting in boundaries, for bothering overstretched teachers; they are blamed for going private, but also for costing the state too much money. The crisis in SEND is not the fault of parents. As Catherine, a Mid Sussex parent, said to me: “They need to see what it is like for parents twenty-four hours a day whose children are at a mainstream school that does not have the SEND facilities and teachers that it needs to meet the demands of its pupils. Teachers have enough to do. Why would any parent try to play the system for SEND, when it’s so much paperwork and time? You just would not do it.” Please let us listen to the voices of the parents who gathered outside earlier today. They know their children, they know what they need, and they know that the current system is failing not only their children but society at large.

• 10 Sept 2025 · Qatar: Israeli Strike · Hansard source

  More

  Can the Minister confirm whether the Attorney General will publish any advice that he or the Government have received on whether there have been breaches of international law during the conflict in Gaza?

• 9 Sept 2025 · Better Futures Fund · Hansard source

  More

  The better futures fund rightly targets the needs of vulnerable children, and one such group are those who are subject to adoption or kinship arrangements. Last week the Department for Education announced that it would renew the adoption and special guardianship support fund for one year, but did not say that it would reverse the 40% cuts in per-child funding that were announced in the spring. Does the Minister agree that reversing those cuts is vital for protecting families and keeping children in adoption arrangements, and will he meet adoptive families from Mid Sussex so that he can better understand the benefits to the Treasury that investing in adoptive families will bring?

• 4 Sept 2025 · Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for her kind words. She is absolutely right. I will address her point in due course. When I saw Rachel this morning and told her about the one-year renewal of the fund, she told me that she had come out in goosebumps as a result. That is how much this fund matters to adoptive families. I have seen for myself the difference that the fund makes. One parent told me that her gratitude for the ASGSF was immeasurable, and that she would never have been able to be an adoptive parent today without it. She spoke about two professionals whose “deep understanding, profound compassion and reflective empathy” had supported her and her children through multiple crises and out the other side. Such stories are not rare. Every year, Adoption UK’s adoption barometer shows consistent results: 85% of families who access the fund say that it makes a positive impact; 94% say that they would use it again. So, yes, it was a relief in April when my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) secured a commitment from the Minister that the fund would continue, but that relief came only after weeks of absolutely unnecessary anxiety. Families were left in limbo, and providers unsure if they could keep going. Even now, huge problems and unanswered questions remain. The profound concern that I am hearing from families, therapists and charities working with adoptive and kinship families is about whether the Government are going to learn from the shambles of the spring and not repeat those mistakes.

• 4 Sept 2025 · Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention; he makes an excellent point. A lack of long-term funding will put people off adopting children or taking children into kinship care. It also risks putting providers off providing support. Ministers have insisted that the fund has not been cut, but that is because the overall pot has remained unchanged. For children and families, however, the reality is very different. Individual allowances have been reduced. The per-child therapy limit has been slashed from £5,000 to £3,000, which is a 40% cut, and the separate £2,500 allowance for assessments has gone. Match funding for complex cases has ended. Families now face impossible choices; they can have therapy or assessment, but not both. One provider put it bluntly, saying: “It’s like asking a garage to fix a car without first checking what the problem is.” This situation is a waste of time and money, and the consequences are already being felt. Children have had their therapy stopped abruptly while applications were resubmitted. Families have endured months-long gaps without support. Parents describe sharp declines in mental health, rising violence in the home, and children losing trust in professionals. One provider told me of a young child who was heartbroken to learn that their therapy was ending. They asked: “If I save up my pocket money, can I keep seeing you?” That question should haunt us all; it certainly haunts me. It shows just how fragile trust is for children whose lives have already been shattered by trauma, and whose early years have been defined not by making the secure attachments that are so important for getting the right start in life. Relationships are everything; to pull away support is profoundly damaging. The data backs that up. This year’s adoption barometer found that 42% of families reached crisis point in 2024; 77% said that it feels like a continual struggle to get the help their child needs; and 65% experience violent or aggressive behaviour from their child. I know that there are parents behind me in the Public Gallery who have experienced violence from their children this very week. And in Kinship’s 2024 survey, more than one in eight kinship carers expressed the fear that they might not be able to continue caring for their children. Meanwhile, the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy has warned that these 40% cuts per child will have a “negative and long-lasting impact.” That seems to be putting it mildly. Families, providers, experts and children themselves all say the same thing—these cuts are devastating. It is not just the children and their families who will pay the price; the Treasury will, too. There will be placement breakdowns, more children in care, more exclusions, more antisocial behaviour and more long-term damage. All these things cost the state money. The cost of withdrawing support is far higher than the cost of sustaining it. On top of the cuts there is the uncertainty, even with the extension announced today. Providers cannot plan and families are turned away. Experienced therapists have warned me that that will “replicate the cycle of deprivation and abuse” that these children have already suffered. What message do we send if we withdraw the one source of essential therapeutic support that children and families rely on?

• 4 Sept 2025 · Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes a profound contribution about how we treat the most vulnerable in our society. I do not think I have the answers to that question, but I thank him for raising it. Adoption England has suggested reform to the fund. Devolving it to its regional agencies or local authorities is a possibility, but no consultation has taken place and pilots have not even begun. It would be reckless to make major structural changes before the evidence is in, and it would risk leaving children and families in deeper crisis. That is why we were particularly glad to hear this morning that the Department will engage with families and providers. Charities such as Adoption UK, the Consortium of Voluntary Adoption Agencies UK, Coram, Kinship, Barnardo’s and the Family Rights Group are calling for urgent action. They are calling for, first, a permanent ringfenced fund; secondly, a comprehensive review of the April changes; thirdly, a full public consultation on any future reforms—the engagement promised must be meaningful; and fourthly, a two-year moratorium on further changes so that reforms can be evidence-based, not rushed. We should be supporting vulnerable children and encouraging adoptive parents to keep doing what they are doing by providing the necessary support for therapy—not least because in 2021 alone adoptive parents saved the UK economy £4.2 billion. I will end with four questions for the Minister. First, what concrete reassurance can she give children, families and providers about the long-term future of the fund? April’s announcement came too late and caused avoidable harm, and today’s remains short term. Will the Government commit to doing better this time? Secondly, can the Minister assure us that the equality impact assessment was considered as part of the development process for the changes made to the fund that were announced in April, as per the requirements of the Equality Act 2010? Will she undertake to share the relevant documents to support that? Thirdly, can the Minister explain how the decision to cut funding available through the ASGSF aligns with the Department’s wider efforts to increase the uptake among eligible kinship families and grow the use of the kinship care arrangements? Fourthly, will the Minister acknowledge that cutting the support will cost far more—socially, emotionally and financially to the taxpayer—in the years to come? The adoption and special guardianship support fund is a vital lifeline for vulnerable children and their adoptive families. It is not a luxury. The Government must change course.

• 4 Sept 2025 · Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered the Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund. It is a pleasure to serve under you, Ms Lewell. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting this debate, and I thank hon. Members who supported my application. The Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund has, since 2015, been a lifeline for families who are raising children who have endured immense hardship and trauma. I welcome the announcement this morning—nicely timed for this debate—that the fund will continue into the next financial year, giving families and providers a little more of a chance to plan and deliver therapy. It is also good news that the Department plans to engage with providers and families during the reform process. That shows that the campaigning of colleagues, families and providers—including those in the Public Gallery for this debate—makes a difference, and shows that we cannot stop now. But while the extension is welcome, it does not properly address any of the fundamental issues that exist as a result of the cuts announced in April, such as the significant decrease in per child funding, or the lack of a long-term settlement for the fund. The fund was designed to provide children with the therapeutic support that they need to recover from trauma, neglect and abuse. It has enabled outstanding providers, such as Beacon House and Jigsaw in my constituency of Mid Sussex, to deliver life-changing therapy to vulnerable children. The fund also provides vital support to parents such as Rachel, who is here today and who speaks so powerfully about the importance of the fund and the irreversible damage its withdrawal does.

• 3 Sept 2025 · Maternity Care · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Minister agree that listening to the voices of bereaved families who have lost their babies is of essential importance? If he does, will he listen to the calls of Sussex families to appoint Donna Ockenden to lead their review?

• 1 Sept 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The carer’s allowance overpayments review was due to report in early summer. It is now 1 September. In recent weeks, I have become aware of a case where the DWP has informed somebody that they now owe it £18,000. That is a scandal. When will the review report back?

• 22 Jul 2025 · Points of Order · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. At the start of this month, I submitted a number of parliamentary questions to the Department of Health and Social Care on the subject of the independent commission into adult social care. A number of those questions, despite being due for answer on the 7th of this month, remain entirely unanswered as of today, the 22nd of this month. The Department has also declined to estimate the number of hours spent on the commission by the Department since July 2024 on the grounds that the cost of such an estimation would be too great. I ask your advice, Madam Deputy Speaker, about how I can get those questions answered for the benefit of my constituents, and so that I can fulfil my duty in holding the Government to account.

• 22 Jul 2025 · Music Streaming: Label-led Principles · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome today’s announcement, not least because I am the mum of an aspiring composer and performer. I was pleased that the Minister mentioned the work of teachers and the Department for Education in supporting music in schools. Credit should go to Mr Wardrobe from Downlands community school in Hassocks for putting together the band Room 3, by literally putting them in the practice room, room 3, when they were at school. They are now doing really well and performing regularly in Brighton. How can the Minister ensure that the benefits announced today are not just concentrated in London, but benefit all the regions, including Sussex?

• 21 Jul 2025 · Mental Health Support in Schools · Hansard source

  More

  Good mental health at school is sometimes bolstered by out-of-school support, especially for the most vulnerable children. Last week, I met Vicky and her team at Jigsaw Occupational Therapy in Burgess Hill, and I spoke to the families they help. Roughly a quarter of their work involved supporting kinship and adopted children and helping them to regulate following profound trauma. Vicky described the impact on their children of the Government’s cuts to the adoption and special guardianship support fund as “heartbreaking”. Can the Minister offer any words of comfort to Vicky and the families she helps?

• 21 Jul 2025 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  Yesterday, it was reported, as hon. Members will be aware, that at least 93 Palestinians were shot and killed while queuing for GHF-distributed food because they and their families are being starved to death. The fact that GHF stands for Gaza Humanitarian Foundation smacks of an Orwellian doublespeak which I find profoundly disturbing. The Foreign Secretary must surely agree that the current system of aid distribution headed by the GHF is both unsafe and grossly inadequate. Is the Secretary of State content that Britain is doing all it can to ensure it is not complicit in the grotesque use of starvation as a tool of war?

• 16 Jul 2025 · Further Education Institutions · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 16 Jul 2025 · Further Education Institutions · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady is being generous with her time. I want to mention Haywards Heath college, which closed but was then able to reopen in 2020, thanks to the work of Mid Sussex district council and the previous MP. Does the hon. Lady agree that extending the pupil premium into further education colleges would make their financial sustainability more secure?