CORRECTED TRANSCRIPT

HOUSE OF COMMONS

REPRESENTATIONS MADE BEFORE THE

BACKBENCH BUSINESS COMMITTEE

BACKBENCH DEBATES

TUESDAY 1 APRIL 2014

HAZEL BLEARS AND MR GRAHAM STUART

USE OF THE TRANSCRIPT

Representations made before the

Backbench Business Committee

on Tuesday 1 April 2014

Members present:

Natascha Engel (Chair)

Mr David Amess

Bob Blackman

John Hemming

Ian Mearns

Hazel Blears and Mr Graham Stuart made representations.

Q1 Chair: I think yours is the only representation we are hearing today. I must say that we are running up against Prorogation. We definitely have 10 April, which is the day before the start of the Easter recess. We have provisionally scheduled a pre-recess Adjournment debate, and we have loads and loads of things on our list. We are looking at, perhaps, 1 May, which is far from definite. After that there is a lot of ping-pong. I am telling you that because we might not be able to give you anything until our successor Committee meets after Prorogation, so please bear that in mind. We have 10 April, which is the last day of term, and Westminster Hall is available.

Hazel Blears: First of all, thank you very much for seeing us. We are bidding for a debate-perhaps 90 minutes in Westminster Hall. I know how tight time is in the Chamber, although if Chamber time is available, that is obviously preferable. We would like to discuss social mobility. The Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission published its "State of the Nation 2013" report last October. It runs to several hundred pages, is full of densely packed information, and covers a range of issues, including what schools, employers, professions, local authorities, the Government and communities themselves can do to ensure that young people get a fair chance of making a decent shot of their lives.

Since the report was published in October last year, the Government have been considering it and they published their response a couple of weeks ago. We therefore think that it is an apposite time for a really good debate on social mobility. I think that every Member of Parliament has a view on the issue. Many MPs will have expertise in related areas, and I hope that that expertise could genuinely feed into Government policy-making on social mobility.

The report and the response cover issues including child poverty-there has been a great deal of controversy about definitions and data on the extent to which we are dealing with that-and employment, as well as public spending and how far the poorest people in society have suffered to a greater extent because of austerity and the current financial climate. They cover what has been done on child care, and what still needs to be done, as well as schools-the most deprived areas still have 30% fewer good schools than better-off areas.

The commission’s report also covers the transition to work and makes quite a big issue of the fact that the education maintenance allowance has been abolished. It covers welfare reform. On universities, interestingly, there are still nearly 4,000 state school students every year who have achieved the grades to get into Russell Group universities but fail to do so. So there are some really big related issues, not to mention professions, politics, unpaid internships and vocational education-I could go on and on.

Q2 Chair: It is a very general debate.

Hazel Blears: It is a general debate, but I think that the issues cover the whole range of politics and Government Departments. The response is from the Deputy Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. I would think that every Secretary of State has some interest in the issue.

My final point is to read a statement from Alan Milburn, the chair of the commission. The deputy chair of the commission is Baroness Gillian Shephard-it is a non-partisan commission. When the report was published, Alan said: "It is part of Britain’s DNA that everyone should have a fair chance in life. Yet compared to many other developed nations we have high levels of child poverty and low levels of social mobility. Over decades we have become a wealthier society but we have struggled to become a fairer one…Just as the UK government has focused on reducing the country’s financial deficit it now needs to redouble its efforts to reduce our country’s fairness deficit. If Britain is to avoid being a country where all too often birth determines fate we have to do far more to create more of a level playing field of opportunity. That has to become core business for our nation." I would think that all MPs, from all parties, would sign up to that principle. We might differ in terms of how we get there and our policy prescriptions, but it would be an extremely important and exciting debate to have.

Q3 Chair: That was very comprehensive-thank you very much, Hazel. Would you like to add anything, Graham?

Mr Stuart: Hazel has covered the ground fluently and comprehensively, but the subject is cross-cutting. We have not had a major debate on these issues-child poverty and social mobility-for quite a long time. We have had all the reports and we have the Government response. It is cross-departmental, so it is hard for the departmental Select Committees, such as the Education Committee, on which Ian and I serve, to get to the bottom of all this. What better than to have a major debate in Parliament-for which Alan Milburn himself has called-to get these issues on the table? It goes to the heart of the current political debate about where we should be going as a country and the policy prescriptions we come up with.

I bow to Hazel in terms of whether we go into Westminster Hall or elsewhere, but I would like to see a major debate in the main Chamber. I think that you would find, as we did in the past-albeit the distant past-that there would be no shortage of colleagues wanting to participate.

Q4 Chair: Given our time constraints, if we were to schedule something in the Chamber, it would not be until around June time. I know that it is a big and urgent issue, but would that be okay for you?

Hazel Blears: Because the issue is so relevant to people, if we could get Chamber time that would be good. I would not suggest having the debate on 10 April. As it is the last day, we would not necessarily attract the range of people that we would want to get involved. If we have to leave it a little longer, so be it.

Q5 Chair: Given that it is so cross cutting, who would be the Minister responding?

Hazel Blears: The Deputy Prime Minister. He has taken this social mobility agenda to himself. He runs the compact on social mobility. So I think he would probably have a broader view of the issues.

Q6 John Hemming: You mentioned that you are willing to take Westminster Hall, but the implication was that you would prefer to have longer in the Chamber, even if it is later.

Hazel Blears: Yes, I think so.

Q7 John Hemming: The issue of which Department responds is very important if you take Westminster Hall on a Tuesday. This is a big issue that needs three hours. Apart from the fact that you would like the DPM to respond, I don’t think we need to worry about Tuesday in Westminster Hall, do we?

Chair: Thank you very much for that.

Hazel Blears: Thank you.

Chair: Thank you for that very comprehensive pitch. We have the flavour of the debate.