The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sharon Hodgson on 2014-06-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what proportion of staff within his Department who have been dismissed following formal disciplinary proceedings in each of the last five financial years classed themselves as white British.
Elizabeth Truss
Our data does not record nationality; data held records only ethnicity.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sharon Hodgson on 2014-06-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what proportion of staff within his Department who have been dismissed following formal disciplinary proceedings in each of the last five financial years classed themselves as white British.
Hugh Robertson
I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by the Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General, my right hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (Mr Maude), on 16 June 2014, Official Report, column 433W.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sharon Hodgson on 2014-06-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what consideration her Department gives to the diversity policies and records of businesses or other organisations when considering their bid for commercial contracts or grants.
Mr Alan Duncan
DFID considers a number of factors including relevant diversity clauses when considering contracts and grants.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sharon Hodgson on 2014-06-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what estimate he has made of the ethnic breakdown of workers earning between the National Minimum Wage and the Living Wage.
Jenny Willott
The Government supports a living wage and encourages businesses to pay it when it is affordable and not at the expense of jobs. However, decisions on what wages to set, above the national minimum wage, are for employers and workers.
The Government has not estimated the breakdown of workers earning between the National Minimum Wage and the Living Wage by ethnicity.
The Government’s main policy lever in addressing low pay is the National Minimum Wage (NMW). Using the Labour Force Survey, in 2013, 8.3% of the ‘ethnic minority’ group (see footnote) were in jobs that paid at or below the NMW while overall 7.8% of the jobs in the economy paid at or below the NMW. This is as set out in the Low Pay Commission’s 2014 Report, Figure 2.6.
We are absolutely clear that anyone from whatever background who is entitled to be paid the minimum wage should receive it. HMRC investigates every complaint made through the free and confidential Pay and Work Rights Helpline. Since 1 October 2013, employers who fail to pay the National Minimum Wage (NMW) will be publicly named and shamed under revamped criteria announced in August 2013 to make it easier to clamp down on rogue businesses. This is on top of financial penalties which employers already face if they fail to pay NMW.
Footnote:
The definition of ‘ethnic-minority’ group is as defined in the Labour Force Survey (LFS)
Also please note that the LFS overstates the number of Minimum Wage jobs and workers when compared to the Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE) dataset.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sharon Hodgson on 2014-06-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what consideration his Department gives to the diversity policies and records of businesses or other organisations when considering their bid for commercial contracts or grants.
Brandon Lewis
This Government procures on the basis of value for money. Departments and the Crown Commercial Service will ensure that social, economic and sustainability issues are considered in procurement projects and that specifications, terms and conditions and evaluation criteria are developed to ensure that the relevant issues are addressed as appropriate for the subject matter of the requirements.
As outlined in the Written Ministerial Statement of 6 September 2013, Official Report, Column 33WS, on the Government response to the public sector equality duty review, there is clear evidence of equality and diversity policies going too far in the other direction, by imposing unreasonable and expensive burdens on organisations bidding for public sector contracts. The Government has committed to reducing procurement gold-plating by the public sector.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sharon Hodgson on 2014-06-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many schools in (a) Washington and Sunderland West constituency, (b) the Sunderland local authority area and (c) the North East region are receiving less overall funding in 2013-14 than they did in 2010-11.
Mr David Laws
Because of the significant changes in the school funding system between financial years 2010-11 and 2013-14, it is not possible to provide meaningfully-comparable data on funding to individual schools in the two years. In addition, the amount of funding a school receives will change from year to year depending on the number of pupils registered at the school as well as the schools funding formula determined by the local authority, the arrangements for which were reformed in 2013-14 to comprise 12 nationally-consistent factors.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sharon Hodgson on 2014-06-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what proportion of staff within his Department who have been dismissed following formal disciplinary proceedings in each of the last five financial years classed themselves as white British.
Dr Daniel Poulter
Detailed information which specifically identifies dismissals following formal disciplinary proceedings is not held for this full period. The Department publishes workforce information on the .GOV website, which includes figures for staff that have left the Department.
From 1 April 2013 changes have been made to how leaving reasons are recorded on the internal Human Resources System. For the financial year 1 April 2013 to 31 March 2014 14% of staff who have been dismissed following formal disciplinary proceedings were white British and for a further 14% ethnic origin is not recorded on the internal HR system as declaration of ethnicity is voluntary for staff.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Sharon Hodgson on 2014-06-10.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what consideration his Department gives to the diversity policies and records of businesses or other organisations when considering their bid for commercial contracts or grants.
Simon Hughes
The Ministry of Justice is committed to promoting equality and diversity in its procurements. Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 outlines the Public Sector Equality Duty. The following three duties which form the basis of Departments’ policy and to which due regard must be given during the procurement process:
1. Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct prohibited by the Act;
2. Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it.
3. Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it.
The level of due regard given to the three duties will vary depending on their relevance to each individual procurement. There will be greater significance for example where the procurement involves direct contact with the public or employees of the Department or where services are to be carried out in the Department’s premises.
Where a need to consider equality has been identified at the beginning of a procurement process, consideration to this is given at every stage of the process as detailed below:
· Planning and preparation includes the consideration of whether the duties are relevant to the procurement.
· The Pre-Qualification stage of the tender process contains mandatory fields including questions to make sure that the bid is in line with legislation. Suppliers that do not pass these questions are not progressed onto the next stage.
· The Request for Information and Request for Quotation contain questions in line with legislation. These question are proportionate so as not to disadvantage smaller suppliers.
· The evaluation of tenders can include equality criteria if it formed part of the specification. However, if included, the criteria are given proportionate consideration to the bid as a whole.
· Contract award where the specification set out equality criteria can be used to determine the most economically advantageous tender
· Ongoing consideration is given to the equality duties in every review meeting for those relevant contracts.
In addition to these processes implemented during the procurement process, the Department reports annually its obligations to the Cabinet Office. All procurement staff within the Department are required to undertake mandatory Equality and Diversity Training which makes sure that the duty can be considered and applied correctly.
The speech made by Sharon Hodgson, the Labour MP for Washington and Sunderland West, in the House of Commons on 16 May 2022.
I will speak very quickly, Madam Deputy Speaker. When I became chair of the all-party parliamentary group on dyslexia and other specific learning difficulties in 2016, the implementation of the Children and Families Act 2014 was under way. I had taken that piece of legislation through Parliament as a shadow Minister so I was hopeful that it might lead to an advance in SEND provision in schools, but things have obviously not gone to plan. The new SEND Green Paper implies by its very existence that something has gone wrong.
Let us look at some numbers. Pupils with SEN are less likely to meet the expected standards on reading, writing and maths by the end of key stage 2, with only 22% of children with SEN achieving that compared with 74% of those with no recorded SEN. This continues at GCSE with only 27% of SEN children achieving a grade 4 or above in English and maths compared with 71% of those with no recorded SEN. In 12 years of a Conservative Government, those with SEND have endured a broken system, leaving a lasting impact on their futures.
As we know, special educational needs and disabilities are sometimes invisible, making them hard to identify and support. Many working class children are categorised as poor readers, not because they might have dyslexia but because they come from disadvantaged backgrounds. Others who might have dyslexia but do not have the money to access private assessment and diagnosis might never get the support that they need. Far from levelling up, this Government imprison those children in lower expectations.
As we make the necessary strides in special educational needs assessment, so the system supporting those needs faces greater strain on capacity. This is all about cost. I hope that that is not the reason for the conspicuous absence from the Government’s recent Green Paper of the three Ds: dyslexia, dyspraxia and dyscalculia. The Government finally recognise the need for new high-level alternative provision, but I implore them to expand their priorities to specific learning difficulties. They can have a profound effect on a child’s educational development, and without wider assessments we can only guess at the incidence rates of the conditions. In the meantime, children will struggle through their school years and lose the chance to fulfil their potential. That is not to say that those with specific learning difficulties are less able than their peers. On the contrary, neurodiverse individuals exhibit problem solving, lateral thinking and innovation skills often in excess of those exhibited by neurotypical individuals.
This year I was proud to be involved in the launch of Neurodiversity in Business, an initiative that at last count has seen more than 100 companies across the country, including the likes of Deloitte and the Bank of England, championing neurodiverse workers. They recognise the unique skills and benefits that neurodivergent employees bring to an organisation, and that is to be greatly welcomed and encouraged as it is so true. I welcome the Government’s consultation on SEND provision, and I will certainly engage with the consultation in due course. I encourage all colleagues and organisations in the sector to do the same.
On another topic, I would like to take a moment to draw the House’s attention to food insecurity. We know that families are struggling with the cost of living crisis—a crisis that is only going to get worse. More adults are reporting skipping meals—57% more in April than in January—and more children are unable to access nutritious food. At the same time public sector caterers, who make up an important part of the protection against food insecurity, are facing supply chain disruptions and what have been described to me as stock price explosions. It is getting more expensive to run the industrial kitchens in our schools, hospitals and prisons. It is therefore getting so much harder to ensure that services offer the same nutritious food.
The Government are allowing food insecurity to become worse, allowing standards to decline and doing nothing to prevent a public health crisis along the way. This is happening on their watch and there was nothing in the Queen’s Speech to address it. That means it will only get worse until we have a change of Government to one with the will and the plan to grow the economy and be on the side of working people.