Latest news with #EducationQuestions
New Statesman
11 hours ago
- Politics
- New Statesman
The grooming gang fallout is only just beginning
Photo by'The findings are here, and they are damning.' This was the assessment of Yvette Cooper in response to Baroness Casey's rapid national audit of the grooming gangs scandal. As the Home Secretary stood up to make her statement on the Casey report, a group of schoolchildren were hurriedly shepherded out of the public gallery, where they had a moment ago been watching Education Questions. A few stragglers will have heard Cooper speak of the conviction of seven men in Rochdale last Friday for 'treating teenaged girls as sex slaves'. It has, she added, taken 20 years to bring them to justice. This was the theme of Cooper's statement. As she outlined the recommendations in Casey's 200-page report, which MPs were frenetically skimming during her speech, and confirmed that, despite the Government's insistence to the contrary that there was no need to hold a national public inquiry into this scandal, one would now be launched, she returned again and again to the issue of time. 'Most disturbing of all,' Cooper told MPs, 'is the fact that too many of these findings are not new.' Later, she cited 15 years of reports and reviews: 'We have lost more than a decade.' This is the message the government will be trying to get across as the backlash from the report – and from the six months of delay since this historic scandal was pushed to the top of the news agenda in January – plays out. The failings listed in such stark terms by Casey, horrific though they are, should not come as a surprise: victims as young as ten repeatedly failed by police and social services; the use of the law to protect adult perpetrators rather than child victims; ethnicity data not collected; calls for mandatory reporting of child sexual violence (which Cooper herself demanded 10 years ago) ignored; a 'deep-rooted failure to treat children as children'. Cooper attempted to strike an impartial tone, trying (though not always succeeding) to keep the emotion out of her voice as she outlined the steps which had not been taken over the last decade and a half, during almost all of which the Conservatives had been in power. She talked of the House coming together now to right this injustice, as though the cross-party consensus of the horrors in the Casey report could extend to cooperation. Any such illusion was shattered the moment Kemi Badenoch stood up to respond. It is no surprise the opposition leader chose to take this on herself rather than leave it to her shadow home secretary. There are few issues on which she is more passionate, and few areas on which her attacks against the government land better. 'We all know this is another U-turn,' Badenoch contended, sweeping away Cooper's attempts to deflect the government's abrupt change in stance. Her rhetoric had the frenzied intonation of a religious preacher as she accused the Home Secretary of having been 'dragged' to this new position, and the Prime Minister of 'an extraordinary failure of leadership'. While the House was hushed in sombre silence while Cooper spoke, the jeers and taunts from both sides while Badenoch was on her feet were grew so aggressive she had to pause and repeat herself as she ran through a list of the three times Labour MPs had voted against the national inquiry the government now supports. Pausing theatrically for a sip of water, she speculated that perhaps the fact these crimes often occurred in Labour-run local authorities was a factor in the government dragging its heels. 'The people out there believe this is why nothing has happened,' Badenoch added slyly, couching her accusation in terms of rumour and public discontent. There were cries of 'shameful' from the Labour benches; Cooper looked pale with anger. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe These are the battlelines to watch as this fight plays out: the Labour government endeavouring to take the heat out of an issue that has exploded on their watch, the Conservatives determined to stoke it. And not just the Conservatives: four Reform MPs were present in the Commons today (though Nigel Farage was absent – as was Rupert Lowe, which is curious given he has been spearheading his own grooming gangs inquiry campaign). Critics of the government have all the ammunition they need. Cooper all but said it herself: the findings in Casey's report are damning, but they are not new. Starmer and Cooper can argue that they were waiting for the recommendations that they will now implement in full – including an inquiry with statutory powers, new police operations, new ethnicity data and research, and further support for child victims – rather than rushing in with a half-baked response. But this hesitancy has made the government appear bounced into its new position, and as such they have lost much of the moral high ground they had when pointing to the Conservatives' patchy record on the topic. It is true that Badenoch only seemed to care about this issue once she was out of office and looking for a stick with which to beat the government. It is also true that the government handed that stick right to her. [See also: The truth about the grooming scandal] Related
The Independent
27-01-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Conservative law to ban phones in schools is ‘gimmick', Education Secretary says
The Education Secretary has rejected calls to bring in a new law to ban phones in classrooms, as she branded the Conservative Party's proposal a 'headline-grabbing gimmick'. Bridget Phillipson said she agreed that mobile phones should not be in lessons, but added the opposition were wrong to say it could only be done by introducing legislation. She also told MPs the academies movement will 'continue to flourish' despite a letter from the Children's Commissioner Dame Rachel de Souza which said it would lead to children being in failing schools for longer. The Conservative party said last week that it would table an amendment to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill that would require the Government to ban phones in classrooms. Shadow education secretary Laura Trott asked Ms Phillipson whether she would support her party's plans. To fix the problem, guidance needs to be put on a statutory footing Laura Trott She said: 'We know that smartphones in the classroom have a negative impact on reading and educational attainment of children in general. 'When in government, we issued guidance to try to ban smartphones in the classroom, but the latest evidence is clear that they are still far too prevalent in schools. 'So to fix the problem, guidance needs to be put on a statutory footing. 'Does the Education Secretary agree that children's education outcomes are negatively affected by smartphones, and if she does, will she back our amendment to ban them from the classroom?' Under former prime minister Rishi Sunak, the then-Conservative government issued non-statutory guidance to schools in England intended to stop the use of mobile phones during break and lunch periods in schools, as well as in lessons. Ms Phillipson referenced the previous Government's approach to phones inside schools and said nothing had changed. The Conservative Party tried to block the schools Bill earlier this month amid calls for a new public inquiry into grooming gangs. Replying during Education Questions in the House of Commons on Monday, Ms Phillipson said: 'I agree that phones have no place in the classroom. It is entirely right that schools take firm action to stop their use, and I know that that is what the vast majority of schools already do. 'As (Ms Trott) just said, last July, they said that they didn't need to legislate in this area. Nothing has changed in this time. I back the approach that they took in July in this area. 'Yet again, another headline-grabbing gimmick. No plans to drive up standards in our schools. Yet again, another headline-grabbing gimmick. No plans to drive up standards in our schools Bridget Phillipson It came as the Conservatives urged the Government to listen to concerns raised by the Children's Commissioner about Labour's schools reforms. Ms Trott and Tory whip Nick Timothy referenced the letter sent by Dame Rachel to MPs, which said she could not support the plans as they stood. The Bill includes the removal of the requirement for failing schools to be automatically converted into academies. Before taking on her position, Dame Rachel was co-founder and chief executive of the Inspiration Trust – a multi-academy trust with 17 primary and secondary schools in Norfolk and north Suffolk. It also has five sixth forms. In written evidence for the Bill, she said: 'I am deeply concerned that we are legislating against the things we know work in schools, and that we risk children spending longer in failing schools by slowing down the pace of school improvement.' Ms Trott told MPs: 'Just today, we had another voice come out against the disastrous academy proposals in the Government's Bill. The Children's Commissioner in a scathing letter said that ending the academy order to turn around failing schools will mean, and I quote, 'that children will spend longer in failing schools'. 'Her own backbenchers have said that ending the academy order would be a huge mistake and will weaken standards. 'Instead of running all her policy past unions, who are more interested in their own power than teachers' pay, will the Education Secretary listen to the Children's Commissioner, her own backbenchers and headteachers up and down the country?' Mr Timothy said: 'The Children's Commissioner says the Government is legislating against things we know work in schools. Katharine Birbalsingh says the Schools Bill is 'catastrophic'. Sir Dan Moynihan asks why are we doing this. 'So why does the Education Secretary think she knows more about education than the Children's Commissioner, the head of the best school in the country and the head of the best academy trust?' Replying to Ms Trott, Ms Phillipson said: 'It was a Labour government that created the academies movement, and a Labour government will ensure they continue to flourish. But the party opposite left 1,000 failing schools which continued to let down more than 400,000 children year after year. 'We will intervene more rapidly and more effectively to turn it around. The party opposite have nothing to say on school standards, more interested in their own record than best outcomes for children.'
