Margaret Mullane MP: speeches

Speeches

• 9 Sept 2026 · Pica Eating Disorder: SEND · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is quite right. That is ultimately what we seek in the long term. We do not want anyone to have to go through what some families have already gone through. Only if we adopt national training will that actually stop. Earlier this year, I held a pica awareness parliamentary drop-in session with Suzy and the National Pica Advisory Service, representatives of which are in the Public Gallery. I met Tolu, Belinda and the team, who do amazing advocacy work to support parents of children with pica. Speaking to advocates and parents, the consistent theme was a lack of professional knowledge across sectors, whether at schools or—this is another important point—when people present at hospital. Parents are fed up of hearing, “The item will pass through; don’t worry about it.” At my event, the National Pica Advisory Service told the story of a parent of a child with pica. Had that parent not persisted in pushing that their child did not just have an upset tummy, one of the child’s organs would have failed and they would have died. There was a screw lodged in the child’s intestines that was discovered only when the parent demanded an X-ray. That should have been the first port of call when the parent explained that their child had pica, not something that, once again, a parent had to fight for. I heard another story of a child in a private-rented property who would lick paint. Sadly, due to the age of the property the paint had high lead content. In such circumstances, had the child continued and—again—had the parent not persisted, it would have led to the child’s death. Early diagnosis and early intervention are key, but so too is ensuring that adaptions are made, environments are made safe and that caregivers and educators are equipped with the knowledge and training to monitor those with pica. In 2023, pica came to prominence in the media due to the tragic case of Owen Garnett, a student at Welcombe Hills, a specialist SEND provision school in Stratford-upon-Avon. Owen had pica and was in an educational environment that understood that, yet after choking on a paper towel unsupervised, Owen sadly died, aged 19. The coroner’s report highlighted that “the school’s risk assessments…recorded that Owen should ‘Never be left alone when out’ and…in bold ‘NB due to Pica, a named person must watch Owen at all times’”. The report concluded that “Owen’s carer specifically raised concerns surrounding blue paper towels at a meeting…On 4 January 2023 Owen was discovered to have blue paper towel in his mouth and a message was sent to his carers saying this had occurred… On 9 January 2023, contrary to the…risk assessment, Owen was outside of the classroom and was unsupervised. When Owen was located, it was discovered that he had crammed a significant amount of blue paper towel into his mouth and throat and was choking.” He was transported to Warwick hospital. He suffered a hypoxic brain injury. A decision was taken to remove life support and, sadly, he died on 11 January. The Health and Safety Executive said that the school had failed to ensure that all risks associated with pica were identified and had failed to respond to family concerns. The multi-academy trust was fined £300,000 and told to learn from its mistakes but, let us be honest, people at the trust can move on with their lives; a family has lost a son and their lives will never be the same again. It was an exceptional case and not a common occurrence but it serves to highlight what can happen if pica is not taken seriously in an educational setting. All children deserve a safe, secure and happy educational journey, whether in mainstream education, a specialist school or other educational settings, but at present that is not being delivered for children with pica. Parents with children who have pica live their lives in a state of constant vigilance, and they need the assurance that their child is being cared for with the same vigilance at school. That is why, alongside parents in my constituency and across the country, and the National Pica Advisory Service, I believe that educators who are responsible for a child with pica must receive mandatory pica training. This will support teachers to grow their knowledge of the condition and how to support anyone who has pica. Training must be about planning for pica. Classrooms are full of potentially life-threatening dangers to children with pica. Risk assessments should take account of all harmful and hazardous substances, including staples, batteries, glassware, sharp or poisonous items and magnets. They should be replaced with safer items where possible, such as non-toxic Play-Doh, paints and crayons. It is crucial that all educators who are responsible for a child with pica must have knowledge about that individual and have read their plan. That is to help them to develop a good understanding of the child’s pica behaviours, how to keep them safe and how to redirect them. It should include completing a pica monitoring form regularly. Through this process, if an individual has particular pica items, those can be identified and removed from the space as part of an ongoing risk assessment. Finally, all educators must learn to understand the signs of choking, poisoning and possible blockages in individuals with pica, so they can seek medical assistance as soon as possible if something goes wrong. Herein lies one of my main worries about the Government’s proposal to reform SEND provision. I have heard many stories of pica oversight in specialist schools—places that have very good, well-trained professionals who should be able to risk-assess and keep children safe. However, because of the lack of specific pica training and the significant pressures in any SEND environment, there are justified parental concerns that pica is treated as an afterthought. As many local authorities are pushed to deliver SEND provision in mainstream settings, there is every possibility—given larger class sizes and more general training—that the new model will not build in specialist training on pica or other specific disorders. I will end as I started, by requesting that pica training is considered for inclusion in any SEND reform, making it a statutory requirement across educational settings and under SEND provision.

• 9 Sept 2026 · Pica Eating Disorder: SEND · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman is right, and I thank him for raising that matter. While this debate will focus on training in schools and other educational settings, it is important to note that there is a desperate need for pica recognition and training across the NHS, local authorities, care providers and even housing providers. However, that is not the focus today. Sadly, pica is still not fully understood, which often results in people being dismissed or the condition being treated as a behavioural issue. While there is a growing consensus that pica must be treated as the serious medical and safeguarding issue that it is, the lack of awareness means the condition is overshadowed. As such, it is not considered by policymakers. That has to change.

• 9 Sept 2026 · Pica Eating Disorder: SEND · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered Pica training within SEND provision. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Betts. Before I go any further, I want to make an admission. Until last year, I had not encountered pica, either in a personal capacity or through my work in Parliament. I had never heard of the condition. My first awareness of it was at a special educational needs and disabilities roundtable event that I organised last year, the purpose of which was to hear the experiences of parents and professionals across my Dagenham and Rainham constituency so I could feed their voices into the Government’s consultation on SEND reform. At the event, I heard a brave story from a young woman and her family living with the realities of pica. There are many moments in a MP’s life that really move them, and despite the thousands of cases that we deal with on behalf of our constituents, there are ones that truly stick with us. The brave young woman at that SEND roundtable was Suzy Read, and she is here today. I can honestly say that her story, her journey, her perpetual struggle and the fight she has had to get her daughter the care she needs and deserves hushed the room. Suzy told us about her life, where she constantly risk-assessed every room, setting and experience, and how the lack of help, combined with the failures of the system, took a toll on her mental health and the physical wellbeing of her child. We heard how the failure to provide access to a safe educational setting for her child resulted in daily anxieties, daily struggles and, because of the lack of pica recognition, understanding and training, daily explanations of why her child required bespoke care. The room was moved to tears. Something Suzy said has stuck with me ever since: “Pica is not rare. It is just rarely spoken about.” That is why I am here today, to make the case for pica training to be a statutory requirement across educational settings under SEND provision. What is pica? It is an overwhelming compulsion to eat non-food and non-nutritional items such as glass, soil, clay, lead, ice and much more. It can include items that poison, puncture organs, choke, and end a child’s life. It is important to note that while the debate will focus on training in schools and other educational settings, pica also affects adults who have lived with it from an early age or whose condition has presented late.

• 9 Sept 2026 · Pica Eating Disorder: SEND · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister and agree with her that this has been a very good cross-party discussion, with thoughtful input from everybody. I know that her door is always open and that she is always there if there is anything we need. What she has committed to today is good news for my constituents. This debate, under your chairmanship, Mr Betts, has been Parliament at its best. An issue that is very important to many constituents across the country has been debated and highlighted. The work goes on. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered Pica training within SEND provision.

• 18 May 2026 · Backing Business to Create Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate on backing business to create economic growth. I also welcome the Government’s commitment to removing the barriers to growth in all corners of Britain. With all the hubbub of the last week, it may have escaped the attention of many that GDP grew by 0.6% in the first quarter of 2026—the highest level of growth across the G7. Although that is positive, it needs to mean more than a percentage point on a graph for communities like the one I represent in Dagenham and Rainham. Small and medium-sized enterprises in seats like mine form the backbone of the local economy and play a vital role in delivering infrastructure, which is why I welcome the announcement of the small business protections Bill, on late payments. This legislation represents a historic moment for small companies, who often suffer at the hands of big business and because of poor payment practices. It is my hope that the legislation outlined by His Majesty last week will support more free-flowing supply chains across the country. Speaking of supply chains, these are exciting times for growth in Dagenham and Rainham. The lower Thames crossing project is playing an integral role in bridging the gap between small and medium-sized construction companies and large national infrastructure projects. I spoke at the lower Thames crossing roadshow in Rainham recently, and it was encouraging to see so many local and family-run companies being awarded contracts and opportunities to upskill their staff. Although my seat did not become the new home for London’s three historic markets of Billingsgate, Smithfield and New Spitalfields, I am still working closely with the City of London, and partners across the south of my constituency, such as the Thames freeport and Ford UK, to determine a new legacy for Dagenham and Rainham. However, “new opportunities and investment” cannot translate into more datacentres springing up across our brownfield sites, draining resources, contributing to the urban heat island effect, and offering very little in terms of jobs for local people. Artificial intelligence, for all its advancement, cannot be all we have to offer the world, and as the steel industry nationalisation Bill progresses through this House, I hope that it will pave the way for a resurgence of British manufacturing excellence and industry. I stood for election on a platform of bringing back jobs that people can raise a family on. That is what the people of Dagenham and Rainham want and deserve, and that is what I am determined to deliver, under a Labour Government, so imagine my joy when His Majesty and our Government set out a plan for apprenticeships, beat the drum of education for all, and painted a vision of a place where every child succeeds and is not held back by poverty, special educational needs or a lack of respect for vocational education. Growth does not work when we all pull in different directions. It works when we deliver opportunities on the ground to everyone, everywhere. That is the mission of this Labour Government, and it is my personal mission to ensure that my constituents in Dagenham and Rainham thrive.

• 15 Apr 2026 · Police Federation · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. Although the Police Federation serves a purpose by taking an active role in raising issues affecting frontline officers, particularly on pay and workforce issues, I am not sure that it is still fit for purpose as the sole representative body of 140,000 police officers across England and Wales. In the last few months we have seen significant failings across the structure, with ongoing investigations into corruption and the accountability of internal processes. Taken together, those issues risk further undermining the federation’s credibility as a representative body. I feel that there has never been a better opportunity to open a discussion about ending the statutory monopoly on police representation. I believe that, so long as operational independence, integrity and safeguards are robust and protected, as a workforce the police deserve the greatest choice in who represents their interests. It really matters to me that the police in Dagenham and Rainham get the very best there is. Having spoken to police officers in Dagenham and Rainham, I know how much pressure they are under and how they often find themselves in terrible and complex situations. I and the people of Dagenham and Rainham appreciate them greatly. With that in mind, I welcome this debate and thank my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle and Clitheroe (Jonathan Hinder) for his work. I support the “Breaking the Monopoly” campaign, and I hope this debate encourages greater parliamentary scrutiny of section 64 of the Police Act 1996.

• 18 Mar 2026 · Royal Mail: Performance · Hansard source

  More

  I think that we would be hard pressed to find an MP or member of the public who does not support their local postie. We know their value, and they were considered the fourth emergency service during the pandemic. What a shame that we did not hold on to that mantle for them as, if we had, I suspect that the service would be much better today. We have heard a lot about two-tier delivery in Parliament and across the media in the past week. Prioritisation of parcels means that days and days of urgent mail is often left in the sorting office. Despite dedicated posties requesting overtime to clear backlogs, the message from Royal Mail management is clear: they want the service to fail. They are making the job harder for staff on the ground by freezing overtime and forcing unsustainable workloads, and we are seeing a managed decline of a treasured British institution. Since 2022, worse pay and drastic watering down of terms and conditions have seen 27,000 new employees leave in the first year. The Royal Mail used to be a job for life. I have an excellent relationship with the posties in the CWU east London postal branch and in my own constituency in Dagenham and Rainham. That is due to the late Lee Waker, a councillor who was a dedicated postie and a CWU political officer—a legend. Last year, Ofcom concluded their assessment of postal service reforms. It announced that the specification for the universal service obligation will change, and referenced letter decline as a key driver. Tell that to the millions of people waiting for medical appointments or facing late fees, which hon. Members have mentioned. If things do not change, we might be telling people that their postal vote was not counted because Royal Mail bosses have delayed people’s votes—their democratic right. Royal Mail need to listen to the CWU and to Government. I want to say in the strongest possible terms that this is not the fault of our posties; they pride themselves—

• 3 Feb 2026 · Town and City Centre Safety · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to be here under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Derby South (Baggy Shanker) for securing this debate. Many of my constituents are in regular contact with me about safety in their town centres and local high streets. If criminals are allowed to prevail, law abiding residents feel unsafe and are deterred from popping to their high street and town centre. That adds to the deterioration of our high streets and town centres, which have already had 14 years of Tory austerity to help that process along. Closed shops, rubbish piling up and an over-concentration of vape shops, barbers and betting shops hardly encourage visits to our communities. High streets and town centre shops matter: we build relationships with our shops and community spaces. Unless the police are given greater resources to tackle shoplifting in places such as Dagenham and Rainham, my residents will be put off visiting the shops. I welcome the Pride in Place funding for Barking and Dagenham, but what we need to focus on—this is a big issue in my constituency—is that when criminals feel that they can get away with shoplifting, crime escalates. In Elm Park in my constituency, one shopworker was assaulted. When the criminals could not get what they wanted without paying in one shop, they ran into another, stole its cash and assaulted the shopworker. The human cost is terrible: that worker was traumatised. Without a doubt, we all enjoy shopping online, but equally, we take joy in popping out and visiting our local shops. Local authorities should think about local start-up businesses with short leases, look at the areas where great things work and share best practice. The Government will give councils the power to say no to businesses that do not enhance their area. I heard my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government give a sterling defence of our town centres and high streets on Sunday. I welcome that renewed focus from the Government and hope that we start to see the investment that is much needed for our high streets to thrive again.

• 2 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  Today, as this House continues to debate last week’s Labour Budget, we turn a spotlight on investment and renewal. Thankfully, we have moved on since the Liz Truss Budget—we are no longer talking about growing pies. This Labour Government are in the business of growing the economy, which has gone up by 1.5% this year, alongside less borrowing and lower levels of inflation. That is helping homeowners with their mortgage rates and enabling businesses to invest. The Conservatives and Reform would take Britain back to austerity, but we have closed that door. While the popular trend on social media is to wander around with a microphone and do down areas such as Dagenham and Rainham, those divisive campaigns offer no solutions. Labour is making fair choices, such as the incoming mansion tax, allowing us to reinvest in our national health service and build on the progress we have already made on appointments and neighbourhood health centres. As new investment becomes available off the back of this Budget, I will keep banging the drum for Queen’s hospital, in the hope of securing the £35 million needed to expand its emergency department and bring down waiting times for my constituents. Dagenham and Rainham has felt the pinch for too long, suffering a cost of living crisis in which hard-working families have been pushed to the breadline. It does not have to be like this; we are choosing a different path, but that is not without its challenges. We knew that there would be tough choices to balance the books after 14 years of catastrophe, but thankfully some choices are easier for Labour politicians to make. Above all else, this Budget was a renewal of our Government’s contract with the ordinary working people who form the backbone of Britain. Raising the living wage and the minimum wage and increasing the wages of young workers is putting pounds back into the pockets of my constituents. Those measures, coupled with our action to reduce energy bills by £150 and the continued freeze on fuel duty, mean that working-class communities across the country will have more to show for their hard work at the end of the month. When it comes to investment in my seat, I could talk about London’s largest film studio, University College London’s state-of-the-art person-environment-activity research laboratory in east Dagenham, or the upcoming new rail station at Beam Park that I am sure will be delivered under a Labour Government. I could mention that only last week, I welcomed the Minister for Energy Consumers—the Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, my hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West (Martin McCluskey)—to my seat for a hydrogen summit at the Centre for Engineering and Manufacturing Excellence, where they unveiled £73 million of investment in jobs and opportunities to build the low-carbon economy of tomorrow. There are lots of promising investment and growth opportunities in the south of my constituency within the Thames freeport area. Working with Ford, the City of London, the freeport and our Government, I am sure that through this and future Budgets, we can deliver on my election promise to bring jobs that people can raise a family on back to Dagenham and Rainham. For me, though, the real story of investment at this Budget is our investment in the next generation—an investment that will lift 450,000 children across Britain, including 5,050 children in Dagenham and Rainham, out of poverty as we scrap the two-child benefit cap next April. I will wrap up with a quote that was often cited by my predecessor: “To be truly radical is to make hope possible, rather than despair convincing.” That is the mission of a Labour Government, and for Dagenham and Rainham, I think this Budget begins that work.

• 7 Jul 2025 · SEND Provision: London Borough of Barking and Dagenham · Hansard source

  More

  There are now 33 primary and secondary ARPs in the borough, compared with just 14 a decade ago. Over that period, the number of children who rely on the services has increased from around 180 to 450. Despite the creation of 230 specialist places over a four-year period, with 90 more planned by September this year, thereby increasing the proportion of children with SEND in mainstream schools, the local authority still faces a monumental challenge to provide enough places to support the needs of all the children who require them. Over the past decade, the local authority has worked diligently to ensure that our schools are inclusive, and has aimed to place children and young people with SEND in local mainstream schools where possible. This has resulted in many of those children going on to achieve very well. Taking this approach has enabled the council to manage the dedicated schools grant high needs block within budget, despite chronic underfunding over the past 14 years under the previous Government—so much so that in 2024, Barking and Dagenham was recognised for effective practice and referenced in a What Works in SEND publication released by the Isos Partnership. To a degree, the local authority is a victim of its own success in this area. When low housing costs are combined with exceptional SEND provision that delivers good educational outcomes, is it any wonder that the parents of children with complex needs are moving to Barking and Dagenham? Over the years, I have heard many stories from constituents who have moved to the area specifically for that reason. Most come from other London boroughs, but some are from as far afield as Cornwall. At this point, I would like to personally thank the Secretary of State for Education for her visit to Becontree primary school earlier this year. The visit attracted positive press for our SEND provision, and highlighted the inclusive approach to SEND education in Barking and Dagenham schools. From an outside perspective, given the sterling service provided, it might seem that the concerns and pressures that the local authority and I have portrayed are being overstated, yet under the surface the council is facing a perfect storm of increasing demand and significant funding shortfalls. In the last financial year, Barking and Dagenham faced a significant overspend, which was covered using council reserves. The local authority had the capacity to balance the budget in that way for only one year. Although the £1 billion of additional Government funding for the high needs block in 2025-26 is welcome, it does not fully address the pressures in Barking and Dagenham. The £5.3 million uplift serves only to cover the current in-year demands, without consideration of the significant level of growth in the borough. It is clear to me that the high needs block funding allocation formula needs to be reviewed and updated to ensure that it is evidence based and better targeted. The high needs block funding stream is still to an extent determined by historical data, and does not reflect the changing patterns of need in London, so boroughs like Barking and Dagenham find themselves underfunded compared with inner-London boroughs, while managing the increasing demand from families who have moved out of better funded inner-London areas. The crisis in SEND provision in early years and education is not due to a lack of good intent, but is perpetuated through long-term under-investment, the fragmentation of services and a degree of inflexibility that the last Government built into the system.

• 7 Jul 2025 · SEND Provision: London Borough of Barking and Dagenham · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Gentleman for his points. That is happening against a backdrop of 14 years with no investment for councils and they are really struggling. On behalf of the local authority, I urge the Department for Education to invest more in the development of truly inclusive schools, well-funded and resourced, so that Barking and Dagenham can increase the provision of SEND support in a mainstream setting. If the local authority could ensure a high standard of support through on-site additionally resourced provision and other mainstream settings, that would reassure the parents of children with SEND that their child’s educational needs will be met without reliance on an EHCP. I think that would help to significantly reduce stress and anxiety, which the hon. Gentleman alluded to, for thousands of people in our borough. Having spoken to many parents of children with SEND across my constituency, I know that they have to fight for everything and that in most cases they get little to no support at present without an EHCP in place. The system is too convoluted, and it does not work for parents, children or local authorities. More needs to be done to streamline the assessment process, so that parents are not jumping through hoops for months on end, and that the best possible care and educational support can be delivered without the constant battle that parents currently face. When considering the provision of services in Barking and Dagenham, we must also take account of the level of deprivation and the impact that has on the level of need. Barking and Dagenham has the 21st highest deprivation score of the 317 local authorities in England, with 62% of households in the borough having at least one measure of deprivation as measured on the index of multiple deprivation. Furthermore, 46% of children in Barking and Dagenham are estimated to live in poverty, which is the third highest across England and Wales. Deprivation on such a scale means that we have some of the poorest health outcomes in London, and 30% of all households in the borough are home to a resident with some form of disability that requires a support service. The council is trying really hard to find innovative means to support the growing demand for services in the face of mounting financial pressure, but it simply does not have the resources to establish long-term stability in that respect. Barking and Dagenham has one of the highest proportions of additional resourced provision in the country, with almost a third of schools in the borough hosting an ARP.

• 7 Jul 2025 · SEND Provision: London Borough of Barking and Dagenham · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman makes some very good points. The Minister was discussing that issue this afternoon and tomorrow my hon. Friend the Member for Barking (Nesil Caliskan) will have a debate on that very point. Alongside that, the growing pressures in the health system and the shortages of educational psychologists, speech and language therapists and occupational therapists all serve to make the issue worse. As it currently stands, there is very little likelihood that the EHC teams will be able to meet the demand in Barking and Dagenham.

• 7 Jul 2025 · SEND Provision: London Borough of Barking and Dagenham · Hansard source

  More

  I have secured this Adjournment debate to discuss the provision of special educational needs and disabilities in the London borough of Barking and Dagenham, an area that I am honoured to partially represent alongside my hon. Friend the Member for Barking (Nesil Caliskan). The backdrop to this debate is multifaceted, but my focus this evening is specifically on the pressure facing provision for children and young people. There are currently over 5,500 children and young people in Barking and Dagenham schools who require SEN support. As of January 2025, 3,111 of these young people had an education, health and care plan—or EHCP, as they are more commonly referred to—with the following breakdown: 12 at nursery level; 1,350 at primary; 946 at secondary; 480 post-16; and 323 post-19. This clearly highlights that present pressures are felt most acutely across primary and secondary schools in Barking and Dagenham. In 2022, requests for EHCP assessments saw a rise of 100%, an increase four times the national average, and in April 2025 there were 1,000 more children with EHCPs in the borough compared with January 2023, which is a 50% increase over 15 months. Since these spikes, the level of demand has remained high, with 500 to 600 new requests every year. This is partly due to population growth and churn, with about 26,000 additional residents since 2014, and a similar number of about 18% churn. It is also worth noting that Barking and Dagenham still offers some of the cheapest housing options in London, which accounts for the sheer scale of the population growth. In 2024, 150 children and young people with existing EHCPs moved into, or were placed in, Barking and Dagenham from other boroughs, with around 40% requiring a specialist placement. Staff working in the education, health and care team at Barking and Dagenham council are recording caseloads of 200 to 300 per staff member, which is just not sustainable as a working model.

• 7 Jul 2025 · SEND Provision: London Borough of Barking and Dagenham · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Gentleman. My seat covers two councils, and I always want the best outcome for my constituents. I agree with him and would be happy to do that. Councils are on the frontline of service delivery in Britain and although this debate is not about broader service funding, I must take this opportunity to thank the Government and to welcome the introduction of the recovery grant as part of the most recent local government funding settlement—a move that marked a significant step change from the previous Administration. However, I return to the subject of SEND provision and funding allocation, which desperately needs a similar step change, as I begin to conclude my contribution. The London borough of Barking and Dagenham is doing everything that the Government are asking of it, yet we are still working to a system built by the Conservatives. The last Government allocated safety valve funding based on the scale of the deficit rather than the scale of need. The safety valve agreements essentially mean that a local authority must cut its spending to meet targets; in return, it gets a contribution towards its overspend. That means that our local authority, having worked to implement inclusive strategies, often through innovative means, to reduce pressures on the high needs budget, gets nothing from that funding stream. In comparison, authorities such as Kent, which have far less deprivation and need, have received in excess of £42.6 million since 2023-24. A fraction of that money would help Barking and Dagenham maintain and progress the inclusive service it has worked so hard to deliver over the past decade. I must say that it is wonderful to see our inclusive SEND provision under the national spotlight, being championed by Ministers, but it still beggars belief that under the current system, if a local authority manages to fly in the face of low expectation and deliver an exemplary service, it is penalised within the safety valve programme. I hope that, as the Government get to grips with the SEND crisis facing local authorities in the coming years, a process of co-production and consultation will lead to a delivery model that incentivises the inclusive approach taken in Barking and Dagenham. Local authorities such as ours are desperately calling for a national funding formula that allocates resources based on evidence and need, bringing schools, health partners, parents of children with SEND, and the council together. I know that we can build a service that provides the best possible start in life and outstanding educational outcomes for the most disadvantaged young people in our communities. I end by repeating the Government’s mantra from last July: “It’s time for change”.

• 11 Jun 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q7. Will the Prime Minister join me in condemning decisions taken by the Transport Minister of the previous Government, who turned their back on promises to deliver a new train station at Beam Park, which derailed growth in my constituency of Dagenham and Rainham? Will he also agree that the Grampian condition on the Beam Park development must be honoured, and that infrastructure must accompany all developments of scale as we get on with the job of delivering millions of new homes?

• 8 Apr 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister introduce a 12-month delay to the incoming change in taxation for double-cab pick-up trucks? The manufacturers and their commercial customers feel that they have had insufficient time to adjust to the new changes this month. Can he share with us any impact assessment work carried out on the reclassification of double-cab pick-ups and what effect it would have on the sector in Britain?

• 18 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve on your Committee, Dr Murrison. I do not see how turning border security into public discourse on a case-by-case basis is beneficial to the process, either for those administering or presiding over the hearings, or for those subject to the tribunal process. I accept that there is an argument for greater transparency, but given the circumstances of people’s arrival at our borders—they are fleeing trauma, in a vulnerable state—I feel it is inappropriate to parade the lives of asylum seekers in the public domain. I have every faith that the Bill will create a robust system that is effective and accountable. The new clause would add nothing to its overall strength. The hon. Member for Stockton West says that trust has been lost in the asylum system. I think it will take this Bill and this Government to bring that trust back.

• 18 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The new clause is not in keeping with the provisions outlined in the Bill, which primarily focus on border security through new and strengthened law enforcement powers, providing intelligence to address organised immigration crime. I fundamentally disagree with the context of the new clause. Subsection (2) relates to existing legislation whereby the qualification of indefinite leave to remain applies to people on skilled work visas, scale-up worker visas, entrepreneurial or investor visas, innovation founder visas, or UK ancestry visas, and people with a partner who holds citizenship. Those people are, for the most part, contributing to our society through work. If somebody has been living and working here in a skilled role, or innovating in our country—and possibly even supporting job creation—for five years, that is long enough for them to identify Britain as their home. They will have friends and community networks. In most instances, they are boosting our economic productivity. The increased qualification period set out in the proposed new clause would move the goalposts for skilled workers after years of contribution. I will bring the conversation back to the purpose of the Bill: the Committee’s focus should be on those entering the UK illegally and those engaged in organised immigration crime, not the construction workers, nurses, doctors, investors and business owners in Britain on work visas.

• 13 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Dame Siobhain. I disagree with the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire. Given what we have seen play out in the last few weeks, I welcome the measures outlined in the new clause, which answers some of the issues highlighted by new clause 44, which was tabled by the Opposition. I draw attention to the amendment of section 3(1)(c) of the Immigration Act 1971, which would put in a place a robust suite of measures to monitor and manage those coming into our country. Let us not forget that the new clause focuses on those who are coming here illegally and who are known to have been involved in criminality. The use of curfews, as well as inclusion and exclusion zones, with the possibility of extending conditions where the Secretary of State sees fit, will be a marked improvement on the incoherent approach currently in use. As we have debated in previous sittings, the provisions in the Illegal Migration Act 2023 and the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024 are not fit for purpose. I believe that new clause 30, with greater intelligence and the duties of co-operation outlined in clause 5 relating to the role of the Border Security Commander, will create a foundation for better communication and data sharing between our intelligence agencies and their international counterparts. I feel that it will greatly improve on the current situation, in which, in the past few weeks, criminals and those with links to terrorist organisations have entered the country with limited restriction under the flawed legislation of the previous Government.

• 11 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Good morning, Mr Stuart. It was interesting to hear from the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire that he considered the Rwanda scheme a crackpot scheme. Another opinion is that it was “un-Conservative and un-British”—the opinion of John Major, the former Conservative Prime Minister. We have to acknowledge that the basic principle of this Bill is to address the failures of past legislation. Indeed, the Minister explained during an earlier debate that it is not possible to make the suite of legislation involved in the Safety of Rwanda Act and the Illegal Migration Act work together coherently. Not to repeal the Safety of Rwanda Act would undermine confidence in the credibility of the Bill. We are moving away from reliance on expensive gimmicks, hotel use, the flaw that is the Rwanda Act, with its price tag of £700 million of taxpayers’ money, and failure to effectively process the people arriving on our shores. Do we really believe that clinging to a piece of dead legislation is the way to protect our borders and put the safety of our country in focus and at the front?

• 10 Mar 2025 · Special Educational Needs and Disabilities Funding · Hansard source

  More

  Has the Department give due consideration to updating the allocation policy? It is currently based on historical funding, which leaves boroughs such as Barking and Dagenham at a disadvantage for SEN provision compared with inner-London boroughs.

• 10 Mar 2025 · Special Educational Needs and Disabilities Funding · Hansard source

  More

  16. What steps she is taking to ensure adequate levels of high needs block funding.

• 6 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve on your Committee, Mr Stuart. I thank the hon. Members for Perth and Kinross-shire and for Stockton West for their contributions. There are a few points I want to make. Clause 18 already outlines provision within the lines that amendment 17 seeks to remove. Naming the act of supplying an unseaworthy vessel, while removing the broader terminology of an act from the Bill, sets a precedent where we would have to outline all possible acts within the Bill. That is wholly unnecessary and not in keeping with the structure of the Bill. Although providing an unseaworthy vessel is the initial act that causes risk to life, amendment 17 would serve to de-prioritise further acts of criminality that could endanger life in a sea crossing. The wording already in the Bill provides sufficient scope to address what the amendment seeks. Following on from this, I think everybody in this room agrees with the sentiment of amendment 5—that genuine asylum seekers are vulnerable—but it is also important to recognise that someone with the right to asylum could be involved in criminality. The Bill already establishes, through clauses 16 to 18, the provision of a reasonable excuse as a defence, creating a clearer distinction between humanitarian activity and genuine asylum seekers, journalistic or academic works, and those involved in immigration crime as well. I believe that the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire has already conceded that point, having withdrawn amendments of a similar nature.

• 4 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Minister agree that we seem to be having repetition in our discussions about the commander and his abilities within his role? The role is respected, and that came up in the evidence we heard. Does she feel that there is repetition of this point, with the Opposition picking up on it at every moment?

• 27 Feb 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Following on from what the Minister asked you about how we have to be mean or have open borders, I looked at your written evidence, in which you have put as your ninth point, “Make Britain unattractive again”, and then you refer to the Rwanda policy. You say that you do not really know, but we had the National Crime Agency in before you and they were quite optimistic about the deterrent aspects of the Bill. Are you saying that you are not at all? David Coleman: I am not, but at the moment it is to some extent a matter of opinion. The sorts of measures being proposed in the Bill are a development and accentuation of what has been done already. After all, the Government are not doing nothing to try to moderate asylum seeking; they have already, like the previous Government, been involved in discussions with our neighbours to try to come to an agreement on all sorts of aspects of migrant trafficking. The Bill is trying to ratchet that up, perfectly reasonably. So far those measures, although admittedly not as intense as this Bill wants to impose, have not been notably successful. I drew a parallel with the war against drugs, which has an effect. It reduces the volume of drugs in circulation and puts drug pushers in prison, but it also puts up the price of drugs. There is a rather depressing parallel there.