Rachael Maskell MP: speeches

4 Jul 2025–3 Jul 2026

How these years work

Our reporting years run from 4 July to 3 July, starting with the 2024 general election. They are not official parliamentary sessions. Office costs keep IPSA’s April–March financial years. Records may cover only part of a year; a missing record does not mean no work was done.

Read what this MP said, asked and contributed in Parliament.

43 published records · newest first.

Speeches

  • 2 Jun 2026 · Milburn Review: Interim Report · Hansard source
    More

    In York, 410 young people are not in education, training or employment, and we know from Alan Milburn’s report the causes of that. I particularly want to focus on mental health, and the fact that we do not have the right support in place for young people much earlier than the point at which they seek employment. Will the Minister work with the Department of Health and Social Care to ensure that we have systems in place to identify young people who experience mental health challenges, in particular children with adverse childhood experiences, so that they can be set on a stronger path and build more resilience throughout their childhood, enabling them to be prepared for work?

  • 20 Apr 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source
    More

    Some 4% of children are diagnosed with foetal alcohol spectrum disorder. It is totally avoidable, yet it can impact on movement, communication, thinking, concentration and many physiological changes, placing significant demands on the SEND system. Will the Education Secretary work with the Health Secretary to deliver a 1,001 critical days strategy, preventing FASD and rising demand on the SEND system?

  • 13 Apr 2026 · SEND Provision and Reform · Hansard source
    More

    We know the stories, the concerns, the trauma, and the battles and fights. Of course, we know the embedded inequality in the system, in which parents with little agency have little voice. But what is so important is that we recognise that the Children and Families Act 2014 ultimately never came with the funding, staffing, resourcing or culture change that were needed. I will focus on three things today: culture, resourcing and funding, and governance. On culture, although we have heard about rising attainment for so many children, we know that other children just never get that opportunity. Their right to an education is denied. We must change the pedagogy in the education system to make it an inclusive environment, and to ensure that the high-stakes behaviours approach is ended, because it denies neuroatypical children an education. We must address that clash, which is still being driven by a results-based system, and consider children and their long-term future more holistically. I certainly encourage the Minister to look at the work of Sir Ken Robinson, who understood that the system needs to be built around the child, as opposed to the child fitting into the system, and the importance of developing a nurturing environment. In York, we talk about belonging going beyond nurturing. We need to consider how we address the security that a child needs to thrive in any environment, putting that framing around the child and integrating it with a trauma-informed approach. We have heard about adoption today and the trauma that those children experience, but we know that so many children have adverse childhood experiences such as violence and neglect in the home and have challenging pasts that have intersected with their SEND needs, so we must ensure that that approach is put in place. On funding, if we can move resources in this place to fund our national security, we can move funding to secure children’s security as well. We need to resource the system, and not only financially—although without that, it will never succeed—but also, as many have said, with a workforce plan that is integrated with the NHS workforce plan, so that we know when resources will come on stream. That brings me to governance. Risk and responsibility sit in the wrong place in the system, which is why we must look at the impact of the academisation programme on where the lines of accountability are. It is almost impossible to hold those schools to account in the system we have now. I will certainly want to extend these discussions with the Minister when I get the opportunity.

  • 17 Mar 2026 · Immigration Reforms · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Stringer. I congratulate the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire (Pete Wishart) on securing the debate. I have to say to the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes): I do not know who he thinks is working in our NHS and in our care sector, providing the skills, or who he thinks the engineers are who are coming here and building our houses in order to support our economy, but we certainly need immigration to support our economy and public services, which have been so severely under-invested in over the past 14 years. We know our world is challenged. It is stretched and stressed, as we have seen with climate change displacing communities and war springing from that. We are seeing floods and famine across our planet, and as a result people are moving so that they can experience some dignity in their life. Some people come to our shores because they want dignity, and I have to say to the Government that the dehumanisation of fellow citizens of our planet is a complete disgrace and it is not in my name, and it is not in the values of our party. Our party was built on solidarity between communities. The responsibility of a Labour Government is to bring those communities together, as we always have in our tradition, through the trade unions and through our party, to ensure that we are investing in those communities and bringing fantastic integration, as we are seeing in York, where we recognise the dignity in one another and bring it to the fore. The Government seem to have lost their way, and as a result they are losing support. They have certainly lost their beating heart, which must be re-found. The draconian policies that are coming out of the Home Office are deeply damaging to our party and our future, as well as to our country, and I plead with the Government to change course. We know that Reform is not interested in the agenda—Reform Members just want power and have not even turned up for this debate today, so why follow them? Why not put a different stake in the ground with a different tune, which talks of different values—the values that we hold deep, the values that we place in those people, including the care workers who are serving our parents’ generation to ensure that they have dignity in later life? I say to the Government: change course. Change course, as well, on our universities. The policies that have been brought forward for our universities are forcing them into financial ruin. International students have choices, and they used to choose to come to British universities; they are now going overseas. I know from the two universities in my constituency the consequences of the policy. Remove the international student levy, which they should not be paying, and remove the NHS surcharge, which clinicians revile. Ensure that instead we give universities the opportunity to be more inclusive and to have more home students, which the policy clearly rails against. We have heard about already in this debate the impact of leaving the EU on migration levels. We need to recognise the risk-sharing opportunities of working with our European colleagues in a much more cohesive and comprehensive way. We used to be under the Dublin agreement, and we knew the rules. Since leaving the EU, we have not been part of that expression and working together with other countries. We cannot do this on our own, and we have seen the consequences of that. As imperfect as the asylum and migration management regulations are, at least they put risk-sharing at the heart of the agenda. We should be part of that too.

  • 17 Mar 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source
    More

    I refer to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I have met the academics behind the University and College Union reports on the prison education service, which highlighted the real challenges around the wellbeing and mental health of educators, as well as their safety, especially with the racism they have been experiencing. Will my hon. Friend look at carrying out a complete review of the prison education service to ensure it is fit for purpose and able to do the job it was designed for?

  • 5 Mar 2026 · Palliative Care · Hansard source
    More

    I beg to move, That this House notes the findings of the Independent Palliative Care Commission; calls on the Government to implement its recommendations in full, including to establish a comprehensive and specialist palliative care service that is equally accessible to everyone and properly funded, as well as a new commissioning framework that secures a service across all settings and is available from the point of a terminal diagnosis, the advancement of a life-limiting illness or latter stages of a chronic condition; and further calls on the Government to have a focus on workforce planning and training, to provide a comprehensive palliative care service, and to ensure that patients are empowered through future care plans to articulate what they want to happen towards the end of their life, while also establishing bereavement services for all. I am grateful to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and to the Backbench Business Committee for granting today’s debate on the future of palliative care. Although I applied for it last summer, it could not be more timely, as the Government consider their modern service framework. Dame Cicely Saunders said: “How people die remains in the memory of those who live on.” By addressing what she called “total pain”—physical, psychological, emotional, spiritual and social pain—palliative medicine could transform not only the way we approach death, but how we embrace life. Her legacy has since driven palliative medicine, with dedicated teams delivering care. Someone told me in York that they did not know “that such outstanding care was even possible.” Every complexity is embraced and addressed. In 2024, 532,000 people died in England. Marie Curie evidence published two weeks ago showed that one in three people fail to get the interventions they need. Despite requiring specialist palliative care, over 100,000 people received none. Demand is rising, and will grow by 42% in a decade. Where someone dies, on what day or at what time determines the care that they receive. Some 42% of all deaths occurred in hospital, 28% at home, 21% in care homes, 5% in hospices and 4% in other settings, such as prisons. According to Sue Ryder, just 50% died in the place of their choosing. I have had the sheer privilege of working with leading academics and clinicians, health leaders, international experts, charities and people with lived experience, in establishing, with Baroness Finley, the independent commission on palliative and end-of-life care, which is chaired by Professor Sir Mike Richards. We sought solutions to establish equitable access to high-quality palliative and specialist palliative care. I am beyond grateful; I have been inspired and I have learned much. I am also indebted to Professor Fliss Murtagh from the Wolfson Palliative Care Research Centre at the University of Hull. I make particular mention of Professors Katherine Sleeman and Irene Higginson of King’s College London; Oxford consultant Professor Bee Wee; Hospice UK; Marie Curie; Sue Ryder; the Association for Palliative Medicine; Together for Short Lives; my local hospice, St Leonard’s; and so many more. We held 10 evidence sessions and eight roundtables, received 506 written submissions from experts, and spoke to 129 witnesses. We then presented our report to the Minister. Now that the Government have progressed to the modern service framework, they must commission a single pathway across all settings, focused on excellence, crisis prevention and investing in the community. We found that early identification for access to high-quality specialist interventions was transformative for patients. At the point of terminal diagnosis or increasing frailty, a serious illness conversation undertaken by well-trained clinicians—as recommended by Professor Sir Chris Whitty—injects an honest understanding to ensure the best patient-centred care, while capturing the patient’s wider social needs, priorities and goals. It facilitates good clinical planning. Co-produced, personalised and optimal care is supported with palliative medicine. In York, the frailty hub brings all sectors, clinicians and services together. When that is intersected with palliative care, crisis admissions are avoided. Emergency services do not escalate without cause; rather, medicine integrates with the hospice at home team—one team, one set of records, one plan. Avoiding the need for crisis management avoids distress. In the last three months of life, however, almost half of people visited their emergency department, and one in eight spent more than 30 days in hospital. Placing palliative care professionals in emergency departments furthers the model, and allows patients to be triaged to the right service. Clinicians at the back door discharge into community palliative care teams. On the wards, hospital specialists connect with patients, introduce palliative care where appropriate, and seek to discharge to the community, hospice or special hospital unit, reducing hospital deaths and improving disease management. As our bodies fail, high-stakes interventions add little to the quality or quantity of life, yet they carry risk—as do hospital stays—through infection, deconditioning and disorientation. In a far cry from what happened on the Liverpool care pathway, the focus is on enhancing life, not hastening death. GPs have a significant role, and I ask the Minister to review the retiring of the palliative care register, which focuses GPs on identifying patients for palliation early, so that interventions can be considered. Can she set out how she will still achieve those aims? People are identified far too late for palliative support—just 56 days prior to death for cancer, and 27 days for non-malignant disease, like respiratory, neurological, renal or cardiac disease. Those with conditions like dementia are rarely ever referred. While there has been a move away from prognostication of life expectancy, due to its unreliability and often significant inaccuracy, recognition of palliative needs early is key. Marie Curie’s “Better End of Life 2024” report identified that 40% of families had no conversation about deterioration or possible death; 20% were alerted in the last three months of life, and 15% in the last week. Its report, “Measuring unmet need for palliative care”, highlighted that one in three people do not receive specialist care. Its post-bereavement survey in 2024 showed a doubling of unmet need, compared with the 2015 VOICES—views of informal carers: evaluation of services—post-bereavement survey by the Office for National Statistics, which should be reintroduced. That highlights the fact that there is higher demand and poorer access. Furthermore, we know that those from low socio- economic and ethnic minoritised communities are significantly disadvantaged, and face late identification of needs and poor palliative care access. Without agency and advocacy, outcomes are worse, and that is also the case for those with physical and intellectual disabilities. Such injustice demands change. Variation exists across integrated care boards. The responses to Hospice UK’s freedom of information requests showed that spend ranged from just 23p to £10.33 per person. The National Audit Office’s report on this subject shows the inequity, too; figures range from one hospice bed per 2,900 patients to one per 54,300, yet provision is mandated by the Health and Care Act 2022. At night and over weekends, 75% of the time, the availability of advice and interventions available to relieve distress, difficulties and discomfort is inconsistent, although 24/7 services are needed. By day, a single point of contact is essential, as the Association for Palliative Medicine has impressed upon me. Specialist palliative care from highly trained professionals must be commissioned to manage complex pain and symptoms through effective drug titration and interventions like palliative radiotherapy, nerve blocks and neuromodulation, which are often not available. The commission advised rapid escalation of complex cases to specialists, to improve outcomes across all settings. Psychological support is pivotal, yet only 19% of hospices can access clinical psychology. Early assessments can palliate depression or anxiety and their consequences. Young people with life-limiting and life-threatening illnesses must have equal access to care. Paediatric palliative care differs from adult care but is as ambitious in driving excellence. Tailored, age-appropriate care is needed, and expert parents need recognition for their advocacy, too. I particularly note the concerns about transition into adult services; special attention is needed to get that right. I turn to training. Family carers provide £28.7 billion-worth of care annually. They need training and support, to be listened to, and, above all, space to love, be and spend time. In addition to training and accreditation of the whole palliative health and social care workforce in domiciliary and residential settings, hospices and hospitals, we need a workforce plan for the whole pathway. All undergraduate programmes must have palliative care content. Specialist training to support GPs aspiring to consultant status needs dual accreditation, and the commission heard that overseas-trained staff need specific orientation to palliative medicine, as each jurisdiction approaches death differently. Across the whole service, we need high standards and united objectives. In 2024, the cost of dying in England was £24,222. The total for England was £12.8 billion, and 78% of that was spent in hospital settings. By contrast, just £1,017 is spent per person on specialist palliative provision, and £862 on community nursing. Research published today shows that specialist palliative care can save the NHS £7,908 per patient when delivered at home, and £6,480 per patient in hospital. That would save around 1.5 million bed days, or £817 million. Funding for hospice provision—essential healthcare—can no longer depend on bake sales and parachute jumps. Two in five hospices are making cuts, and 380 beds have been lost in a year, according to Hospice UK. Staff reductions and redundancies have occurred. Paediatric palliative care faces a £310 million shortfall, and there has been an overreliance on charitable funding, which is inherently inequitable.

  • 2 Mar 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source
    More

    I welcome the Education Secretary’s commitment to inclusion, but many children in York are not in school because of the disciplinary processes run by multi-academy trusts and the culture that ensues. What will she do to ensure that leaders in such trusts are held to account for that?

  • 25 Feb 2026 · Student Loan Repayment Plans · Hansard source
    More

    I have spoken to the students’ unions at York St John University and the University of York, as well as many graduates, who have told me that a student loan does not even cover the cost of living in our city because housing is so expensive—not only does it put people in debt for the future, but it does not even meet the need now. I believe progressive taxation is the way forward, so that the more someone earns, the more they can pay back into the system, to invest in education, which benefits us all.

  • 24 Feb 2026 · Gaza Healthcare System · Hansard source
    More

    I absolutely am. I heard that evidence too. That passage for the whole of the Palestinian healthcare system must be opened. Even now, aid cannot enter Gaza. In four days’ time, 37 organisations will lose their registration to operate. The provision of healthcare, but also the whole humanitarian support network, will collapse. Although every step that the Government take is welcome, the response has been woefully inadequate, leaving people in an indescribable health crisis. I will never forget the clinicians who have taken the time to inform us of the conditions that they work in, the scale of the challenges they face and the clinical choices they make. One clinician described having to make the choice of which child to save as they looked on at the little bodies writhing in pain and distorted by brutality. Yet the provision of healthcare, water, nutrition and sanitation will evaporate this week. If countries do not step up their efforts in the next few hours, disease will be enabled to spread further and faster. I ask the Minister some questions. What specific demands has he made of the Israeli Government to release all 309 health workers who are being held as hostages and prisoners? Their skills are urgently needed. What specific demands has he made of the Israeli Government to extend the right of all NGOs providing healthcare or preventing ill health through food and sanitation projects to be allowed to continue their work in Gaza despite the registration scheme? When did he last call in the ambassador for Israel in the light of the immediate removal of the NGOs that deliver healthcare and vital humanitarian aid? If she does not extend those licences, why extend her stay in the UK? What has been her response? What sanctions will the UK Government apply to the Israeli Government for ending access to NGO support for humanitarian work in Gaza? Finally, how has the Minister sought for people suffering in Gaza to move to East Jerusalem and the west bank where clinicians are ready to receive them? Given that it is our manufactured F-35 parts that have inflicted so many of these wounds, what more can the UK Government do to ensure that we provide the healthcare facilities, here and wherever we can, to save these precious lives?

  • 23 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source
    More

    I am going to continue. Risks including exploitation can be addressed if we put the right security around a child, so we must move all children out of poverty. A strong correlation exists between children in the justice system and poverty, with over half of children in secure accommodation being eligible for free school meals. The evidence set out in “The Good Society” is powerful regarding why we need to lift children out of poverty. While we are rightly grateful for the steps that have been made, we have more to do. We know that 30% of disabled people live in poverty, and the risk of deep poverty is 60% higher in families with a disabled person. It is right, therefore, that in new clause 2 we seek to find deeper evidence. One reason to look at the benefit cap is that in my constituency we have among the highest costs of living in the country. The cost of housing is holding back families, as they do not have the resources to pay for the basics for their children. That is why I have worked with Citizens Advice in York, and said that I would raise these issues with the Minister. As Pickett and Wilkinson point out in “The Spirit Level”, inequality is the root of each strand of social disadvantage, with the UK second worst in the world. Successive works of academics leading to two reports by Sir Michael Marmot have shown the impact on health outcomes, and whether in education, justice, housing or welfare, or indeed having any agency at all, we have a social and moral imperative to end the inequalities that widened following the 2008 economic crash. I call on the Minister to look specifically at the benefit cap and to move those children forward and lift them out of poverty. We know that if we can turn the tables on their life outcomes, that can make such a significant difference. If we are serious about our society gaining from the economic and social advantage of ending child poverty, we must look further, with a minimum income guarantee as a next step. We must also seriously consider a universal basic income so that no child experiences the deep and pernicious poverty that this place has for far too long held them in, suppressing their life chances and causing such harm.

  • 23 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source
    More

    There could be no greater cause for a Government than to lift children out of poverty, which is why I very much welcome the removal of the two-child limit. However, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has reported that 141,000 children will not see the full benefit of the change and 50,000 children—the poorest of our children—will get no benefit whatsoever because of the benefit cap. We must therefore examine the impact of the benefit cap on these families and how it is holding those children back in poverty. We must strain every sinew to address poverty, looking at issues such as the sanctions in the welfare system; the spare room subsidy, which the Government championed in the bedroom tax campaign; and many more. We know that the impact of growing up in poverty, especially on disabled children, results in a greater cost to the state than were their poverty and destitution to be addressed. Poverty is a source of many adverse childhood experiences, causing multiple disadvantages to children and changing their life trajectories. My work looking into the intersection of child poverty and the 1,001 critical days shows the causal link. When I recently met with a director of midwifery and discussed poor maternal outcomes, she impressed on me how addressing the multiple indices for which poverty is at the root is the most significant step we could take. Low birth rate, domestic violence, substance abuse and intergenerational disadvantage lead to setting a baby, a child and then an adult on to a negative trajectory. When it comes to lifting children out of poverty, we have to look at what is currently holding 4.5 million children in poverty—2 million in deep poverty and 1 million in destitution. The steps that the Government have made are to be celebrated, but there is much more to do. Last week, I had the privilege of launching Kate Pickett’s new book “The Good Society”, so I have spent the last couple of weeks engrossed in statistics and research on the impact of poverty on our society, its causes and the solutions. If the Minister has not read it yet, I suggest he makes it his priority. I describe the book as a manifesto because I believe it echoes our values and provides the evidence base that the Minister needs regarding why holding children down in poverty is a moral ill, when the evidence says that removing the cap will save the Government substantially, and lead to better outcomes for those children in health, education and employment, in the justice system and in society. The Government said that they were going to invest in a decade of renewal and so would reap the benefits within two terms of office were they to remove the benefit cap. The four new clauses before us call for an assessment, which the Government must be keen to make. If we do not, academics will drive out the data and present it to us. Conservative Members are wrong on the evidence base. We need to look at the number of children who have been pushed into poverty over the last 14 years. Life expectancy in our developed country is now ranked 24th out of 38 in the OECD, and our infant mortality is now ranked at 29th. There is a causal link. Whether it is health outcomes, educational outcomes, the impact on families, or the justice system, the roots of the issues can be traced back to poverty in childhood. If we are serious about cutting the social security cost or the prison population cost to the Exchequer, our only path is to invest in ending child poverty and taking our ambition beyond that of the child poverty strategy launched by our Government. The evidence from York, where we have introduced free school meals, is that lifting children out of poverty has significantly enhanced their health and education outcomes.

  • 28 Jan 2026 · Education Funding: Distribution · Hansard source
    More

    I am grateful to the hon. Member for securing this important debate. Sadly, York falls below Cambridgeshire and Gloucestershire in the tables, and ours is the lowest-funded authority under the new fair funding formula, although we have high levels of deprivation. Does the hon. Member agree that when we are looking at school funding—pupils in York are worth as much as those in Camden—we need to look across the piece? York also receives the lowest amount of health funding, and low funding across the board means that our children are getting even less funding.

  • 28 Jan 2026 · Local Authority Children’s Services · Hansard source
    More

    Thank you for chairing the debate, Mr Western. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Woking (Mr Forster) for representing his constituents so well in this debate, and in particular, given the horror story that he shared, I express my condolences to Sara’s family. Colleagues may have heard York’s story, but those who have not are about to hear it. The hon. Member for Woking was right to say that York moved from the position of “requires improvement” to “outstanding” in one go. I have to point out to the Minister that our local authority has the lowest level of funding per capita after the fair funding review, which does not seem fair at all because we are not the most affluent place by far. The catalyst for the change in York comes down to two people: Martin Kelly, the director of children’s services, and his deputy, Danielle Johnson. I pay tribute to them. If hon. Members want to learn about York’s journey and the outstanding achievements that have occurred, the director and his deputy are open to dialogue. At the heart of the change was a new practice model with a committed workforce. We moved from 45 agency staff to zero, on the basis that if someone was not committed to the service and the children, they had no place in the authority. A pioneering approach puts children at the heart, builds on co-production, innovates for change and evidences practice. Through reform, costs have been cut by £7 million. Through co-ordination across services, the local authority has built stability and made a difference to every child. We are desperate to do more—to reshape services, drive change and press ahead with transformations. The model moves from transactional to relational, risk avoidance to risk management, safe certainty to safe uncertainty—that is just about being honest about risk—and short-term interventions to long-term outcomes. Every decision has the child at its centre and considers the long-term implications of each decision, developing resilience all the time. Its strength-based approach seeks out every opportunity for the child and is summed up, “Our children belong in York, connected to the people they love and supported by the network around them.” But the journey does not end there. A child or young person’s holistic needs should be met in one place, so here are my asks of the Minister. Mental health services must be integrated around the child, not separated in the child and adolescent mental health services, which is failing all our young people. We have a SEND hub in the city where all children can gather, along with parents and professionals, in an integrated way, but we need CAMHS as part of the conversation. That will remove the need for a diagnosis, because a label does not describe where a child is on multiple spectrums. We must have fully integrated support around a child’s needs. We need to start young, so I urge the Minister to put the investment into the 1,001 critical days. We know that in the case of foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, for instance, we need to ensure at the very start of life that we have got the right interventions around the parents, including during the nine months of pregnancy. We will then have a stronger opportunity to prevent care orders in future and ensure that there is appropriate antenatal care, as well as comprehensive support for the family. We also need funding in York. I mentioned how low our funding is. We have eight areas in the lowest quintile of deprivation in our city. Everyone, including Ministers, talks about how York is a beautiful city, about the Vikings, and about the walls and the Minster, but that does not make a child safer. In fact, many of the children have never seen those assets, and many are struggling because we simply do not have the resources we need. When it comes to per capita funding, York is in the lowest 25 for schools and 23rd for higher needs funding. Our city needs more funding, because a child in York is worth as much as a child in Camden, and yet we have about a third of the funding to do things. More than that, we want to be able to push our model further, provide more services for parents and ensure that we can keep the family together, which is our objective as we seriously reduce the number of children in social care. We also want to drive our model of good practice further, so that we can draw on the world’s best practice and bring it into York, particularly in the early years—those pre-school years—to support parents on their journey as well. We must work with a child’s developmental pathway, not against it. We therefore need to ensure that we have the right pedagogies in place. I was disappointed earlier in the week in the debate on play in education. To work with children we really need to understand the way that the mind develops. My plea to the Minister is to look through a prism of poverty. We have significant areas of poverty in York, and yet if we put in the right investment, we know that we can make a difference to our children. We are ambitious in York, and I am proud to showcase all that we have done, but we desperately want to go further. We know we can do it—in York, we have always been a laboratory of social change, a pioneering spirit built within all of us—and therefore I urge Government to work with us to deliver more not only of the Government’s objectives but of our own, for our children.

  • 26 Jan 2026 · Key Stage 1 Curriculum · Hansard source
    More

    I am grateful to the Minister for giving way. Will she go back to the Department and ask people there to engross themselves in the evidence, which overwhelmingly shows the importance of integrating play with learning, and to ensure that we take an evidence-based approach to policy making?

  • 26 Jan 2026 · Key Stage 1 Curriculum · Hansard source
    More

    Will the Minister give way?

  • 26 Jan 2026 · Key Stage 1 Curriculum · Hansard source
    More

    I completely agree with the hon. Member. She made the point so powerfully, not least because of her own experience. It is really important that we embed play as a fundamental principle in the curriculum. For far too long, play has been seen as a process of reward or enrichment, not as a fundamental part of a child’s learning, but it is vital throughout childhood for that purpose. To deny play as a core learning approach for improving reading, writing or maths is to not understand education. Helping a child find their own creativity will help them find themselves. Play-based learning is purposeful. Teachers have to really prepare when they integrate play into their work: they have to set the right environment, introduce the right medium, equip the learning space, indoor and out, and integrate that with the interests of the children to optimise the environment and ensure that they really grasp the concepts that they are being taught. As we have heard, England is an outlier in this area, and we have to catch up. When I visited Carr infant school, I saw the contribution that play made to every part of the curriculum. When the school centred learning on play, its outcomes improved. Burton Green school has created environments where children can explore and engage. Whether it is Osbaldwick, Acomb primary or Westfield community school, so many schools across York have totally embraced the evidence of the importance of play. The neuroscience very much determines that play is central. My constituent Charlotte Davies regularly reminds me of the importance of motor and sensory integration so that the brain can be trained to help a child’s ability to play. That is often lost as children are forced away from the right pathways for their education. We need to develop the right pedagogies and ensure that we are creating the physical and mental opportunities to learn. The Government are grappling with the opportunities around developing a proper SEND programme, which we know is important, but if we are going to divert children from just spending time on their screens, creative play, integrated into learning, will make a difference. My plea to the Government is this: follow the evidence, and when it comes to assessments and examinations, let us drop those SATs and ensure instead that we have a proper approach to education.

  • 26 Jan 2026 · Key Stage 1 Curriculum · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mrs Barker. I congratulate the Petitions Committee on focusing on such an important debate, the 216 of my constituents who made the case through the petition, and the teachers and support staff who have very much brought this to my attention. I raise for the record that my sister works in early years, and every night when I go home from this place, she tells me about the importance of play. I have no better counsel than her. The pedagogies that are integrated into our education system will determine the long-term outcomes of a child’s learning and development. It is only natural for a child to engage in explorative, creative and imaginative play when engaging with language and new concepts. It is play that helps a child to process their learning, reinforce its application and take pleasure in the process—of course, roleplay plays a vital role as well. It is during play that a child also learns wider physical and social skills. They will be connecting the neural pathways in their brains and embedding principles deep in their mind.

  • 21 Jan 2026 · Warm Homes Plan · Hansard source
    More

    There are 44,000 homes in York that are energy-insecure, so we really welcome today’s announcement. However, scaling the skills is really important. How is the Secretary of State working with the Education Secretary to ensure that further education has the resources it needs to scale the workforce for the future?

  • 20 Jan 2026 · ADHD Diagnosis · Hansard source
    More

    Thank you, Ms Vaz. It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair. I will be brief. In York, we know that children are waiting for two and a half years to get an ADHD diagnosis. Adults are not even on a waiting list; they are literally in a car park. They fill in a form and then they go no further, although I am assured by services that if people face a crisis, the services will be there—although I am less than convinced of that. In York, therefore, we have been thinking about how we can reconfigure services. This is my specific ask to the Minister. We know that, over a child’s life, the local authority is the controlling mind in providing holistic support for children, particularly those with special educational needs, yet we have a segregated service in child and adolescent mental health services. The two services are not integrated and, as a result, we are not looking at a child holistically. We are seeing them in two sections: their mental health and their holistic needs. That does not work. Therefore, I ask the Minister: can we bring those services together, at least through a formal partnership? If not that, can we put the controlling mind under the director of children’s services, to ensure that they can deliver for that holistic need? As my hon. Friend the Member for Sefton Central (Bill Esterson) said so eloquently, we need to ensure that the functional needs of those children are met. A diagnosis, of course, is an important part of that pathway, but when we are talking about people across a whole spectrum of needs, a diagnosis only partially describes the needs of an individual. If we are able to build the holistic support that a child needs, we can ensure that a child gets the security they need in a timely way, integrate that with the rest of the work being done on SEND by the Department for Education, and ensure that we really see the integration and transformation that this Government can bring.

  • 13 Jan 2026 · Universities: Statutory Duty of Care · Hansard source
    More

    I agree. We must legislate in this place; that is why we are here. I particularly want to thank the student unions, because they are the people who are making the case, day by day, to the employers and the universities about the need to provide that statutory duty and the necessary services. I want to address a different issue that has not been raised in the debate, around mental health services. We know that they are in crisis and, as a result, they are not responding to needs. Often, somebody will have a relationship with their mental health service at home but not when they move to a new area. We need a better transition for people who are neurodivergent, but also for those who experience mental health challenges, to ensure that they are properly engaged with those mental health services. The problem we have is that it is always somebody else’s problem, so we need to ensure that those mental health services are provided through a different model. Particularly within the student setting, I encourage a primary rather than secondary care model, because often the thresholds are in the wrong place for proper engagement. In the primary care setting, there can be a partnership formed between the university, the GPs and professionals to ensure that those services are timely. My final point is about students who do not succeed in their studies and the welfare services that are wrapped around those students. There must always be a second chance for a student. Perhaps they do not get the scores they need; perhaps their relationships with some of their lecturers and professors are not, shall I say, cordial. As a result, conflict can often arise. We always need a second chance for a student so that there is another avenue to pursue and another opportunity ahead of them. That is what a statutory duty of care will confirm for students.

  • 13 Jan 2026 · Universities: Statutory Duty of Care · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Sir Christopher. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) on setting out the case for a statutory duty of care so well. Students face an array of intersecting pressures throughout their student journey. One is the cost of living. York is one of the most expensive places to be a student, not least because of the lack of supply and the cost of accommodation. That bears down on students, who have to take on more responsibilities, often working full time alongside their studies. Having to dedicate more of their time to surviving compromises their studies, yet universities seem quite impervious to understanding those cost pressures by putting mitigation in place, whether by providing accommodation or by supporting students who do not succeed because they have to spend more time on their work. Transport pressures also bear down on students, as does the array of challenges that young people face today, including social media, violence and sexual violence, and we have talked about the interplay of neurodivergence and mental health. It is really important that there be a statutory duty of care on universities to provide holistic support around a student. We must also recognise the challenges facing international students, who have not yet been mentioned in this debate. They are from another jurisdiction with different mental health models, but they also face challenges with their immigration status, which I have come across in York. We need to look at the system. An Iranian student today who would not be able to return to Iran because of the situation there must be able to change their status here. There are many intersections for international students, which we must take on board. In 2015, York had a real surge in the number of students who took their lives. I congratulate the universities and the wider community on looking at how they could put mitigation in place, but 1,108 students have since taken their lives across the country. Therefore, this situation does permeate the sector.

  • 12 Jan 2026 · Higher Education: Government Support · Hansard source
    More

    I am devastated to hear of the situation in Southend. In York, financial pressures are also prevalent. It is very clear that the financial model is failing. This is impacted by not only the resourcing that universities are able to generate but the change to international student visas. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government need to undertake a complete review of higher education funding and ensure that the model works, in order to invest not only in education but in our local economy?

  • 6 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source
    More

    We are really excited about the University of York’s work to develop deep geothermal heat, and we believe that greater cost efficiencies can be achieved by sequencing projects, especially when it comes to hiring the drilling rig and equipment. How are the Government driving efficiencies in deep geothermal heat, so that future developments, such as that in York Central, are more viable?

  • 3 Dec 2025 · Local Media · Hansard source
    More

    I am grateful to be called in this debate with you in the Chair, Dr Allin-Khan, and to the hon. Member for Bromley and Biggin Hill (Peter Fortune). With the media industry’s moves from print to broadcast to digital, and we with the rapid rise of generative artificial intelligence, there are new challenges before us. We must ensure that we have inclusive, authentic media that we can depend on as a reliable source within our democracy—media that can enable close scrutiny and ensure that we hold our country to account, while reaching deep into our communities and creating the connectivity that is so desperately needed in this time. I am grateful that we have a daily paper, The Press , in print in York. Although its content has thinned over the years, it still provides a substantial record of all that is occurring within our community, with high-quality journalism and interest, as it has done for 143 years. It is so important that local news outlets continue; many journalists learn their skills and cut their teeth there, and they ensure that proper accountability within our communities. As we have heard already in this debate, it is important to ensure that the industry can continue to put planning applications and alcohol licensing information in the papers—not just because of the revenue stream, but because it enables our community to engage. We have seen that in our city, where communities have campaigned as a result of seeing such placements of information. I also recognise the breadth of media within York, including the newer forms. There is YorkMix, That’s TV, the Yorkshire Post —a campaigning paper—YO1 Radio and Jorvik Radio, a real community-based radio station. Our universities also have papers, and I when I visited Archbishop Holgate’s school last week, I found that my Q&A there was on the record. It is great to see young people engaging in the future of media. In the light of the fact that we are looking at the new royal charter, I want to turn to BBC Radio York. It has battled so well to bring its expertise and experience to our city, and to shine a light on good-quality journalism and connectivity. If we are to rebuild our national sources of media, we have to start with the local. I therefore urge the Government to look at how we can move more content to local outlets, rather than pursuing the regionalisation that we have seen. That regionalisation breaks connectivity and, in its last iteration, has not been a positive step; we must review that. What we need are more hours of local content—that hyper-local approach makes a difference. If we are to rebuild trust in the BBC, we need to go from the local to the national, not the national to the regional. The new media in this volatile and heated media space provides unfiltered, biased content, when we need critical analysis of what we are witnessing and a recognition of the profiteering of the tech giants. We need serious regulation, and fast: this new digital world is spinning out of control and the toxicity it generates is making some people incredibly vulnerable. It can be incredibly dangerous, and it is building division and hate. A media that started out to extend democracy is now rapidly shutting it down. We must look at regulation—we could have a commission that pulls the industry together to do that. I recommend the NUJ’s “A Future for News” plan, which sets out a balanced approach to how we move forward. As we navigate this new world of fact and fake, we must ensure that the route out is through our local media outlets, so we can hold on to authenticity and rebuild trust.

  • 24 Nov 2025 · Gaza: Humanitarian Obligations · Hansard source
    More

    I thank my hon. Friend. It is an obscenity that mothers cannot feed their infants and have only filthy, disease-ridden water to give to their children. Of course we have to use every lever we have to address that injustice—including sanctions on the Israeli Government. As we have already heard about in this debate, we have applied those to other nations; we must apply them to the Israeli Government too. In the light of the makeshift, ready-to-erect hospitals sitting on the other side of the border, it is vital that there are negotiations to bring them across, so that such facilities can be erected rapidly and provided with the support needed, whether that is equipment, pharmaceuticals or, crucially, medical staff. I understand that the number of health service points has risen from 197 in October to 219 today, but the levels of staffing and equipment have to match the need. With so much reconstruction of medical facilities needed, how are the UK Government ensuring that an assessment of sites is undertaken so that construction can be prioritised around healthcare? Likewise, what are the health needs for the workforce to be taken into Gaza? How can we support that effort, both in this transitional period and in the long term—and with the equipment and pharmaceuticals required as well—so that we can support the supply required at this time? We have already heard about anaesthetics not being available and operations taking place without them; we cannot imagine the suffering that people continue to endure. This is urgent, and we need to be able to address those health concerns. As we have witnessed in wars across the world, it is women and girls who are targeted; sexual violence has further wounded survivors, and we should increase support services for them, alongside rigorous safeguarding to ensure that children are protected from those who, tragically, may prey on them. What has the Minister done to raise that specific issue with the Israeli authorities and to ensure that children are safeguarded? Regarding the health workforce, are we confident that medics and other health professionals taken captive by the IDF have all been released? If not, what is the Minister doing to press that point? Their skills are needed, and it is important that they are given safe passage back into Gaza to support their community.

Explore activity by topic or department

Contributions by debate topic

4 Jul 2025–3 Jul 2026. Existing keyword taxonomy applied to official debate titles and contributions; a contribution may appear in more than one topic and unclassified records are retained.

View as listCommunities and local government: 54Communities and local government54Culture, media and sport: 21Culture, media and sport21Defence and foreign affairs: 26Defence and foreign affairs26Democracy and constitution: 15Democracy and constitution15Economy and business: 77Economy and business77Education and skills: 43Education and skills43Environment and energy: 27Environment and energy27Health and care: 54Health and care54Housing and planning: 13Housing and planning13Immigration and borders: 8Immigration and borders8Justice and policing: 23Justice and policing23Social security and pensions: 19Social security and pensions19Transport: 14Transport14Unclassified: 25Unclassified25
What this shows and doesn't show
4 Jul 2025–3 Jul 2026. Existing keyword taxonomy applied to official debate titles and contributions; a contribution may appear in more than one topic and unclassified records are retained. Published records do not measure effort or effectiveness. Methodology.
Department or topicPublished records
Communities and local government54
Culture, media and sport21
Defence and foreign affairs26
Democracy and constitution15
Economy and business77
Education and skills43
Environment and energy27
Health and care54
Housing and planning13
Immigration and borders8
Justice and policing23
Social security and pensions19
Transport14
Unclassified25

Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →