debates/debates2025-12-01b conversation_19
Source: hansard.parliament.uk (2025-12-01)

UK Parliament Hansard data: debates/debates2025-12-01b conversation_19

Dan Carden:Archbishop Beck Catholic college in my constituency has lost £700 per pupil since 2011, while the number of disadvantaged pupils has risen from 38% to 52%. It is an excellent school with strong leadership, creating great outcomes for pupils. Will the Minister look specifically at the funding calculation for Archbishop Beck and say a little bit about how she is getting resources into deprived areas? \p Georgia Gould: I am really grateful for the work of that school. I set out today the further investment we are putting into schools, including into special educational needs. We are focusing our funding on all schools, but particularly on supporting schools in the most deprived areas. \p Lindsay Hoyle: I call the shadow Secretary of State. \p Laura Trott: There is a good reason why we have an independent economic forecaster in this country. That is because, thankfully, it does not let the Government get away with saying that £6 billion can be absorbed across Government at a time when the spending review has already allocated all the money. So let us have no more of this nonsense: where is the £6 billion coming out of? Is it SEND or is it schools? \p Bridget Phillipson: Let me be absolutely clear: these are council deficits. They will not be coming from school budgets. Over the course of this Parliament, we are investing more in SEND. We are picking up the pieces of a system on its knees left behind by the party opposite. Either the right hon. Lady has not read what the OBR has to say, or she is wilfully seeking to mislead parents and to scaremonger. It was not a priority for her in her conference speech; it is not a priority for her now. \p Lindsay Hoyle: Sorry, but we cannot get away with “mislead”—that is like “lying”. I am sure that the Secretary of State will wish to withdraw the comment. \p Bridget Phillipson: Of course, Mr Speaker. \p Laura Trott: The right hon. Lady can rail against the forecasts, the Tories, her own leaky Back Benchers and probably, privately, the Treasury all she likes, but the spending review has set departmental budgets for the year in question. There is not £6 billion down the back of the sofa, so unless she can say where else the £6 billion is coming from out of Government resource departmental expenditure limits—clearly, she just failed to do so—it must be coming out of schools or SEND. So let us try again: will she be straight with teachers, parents and her own Back Benchers, and tell us what is being cut? Is it SEND or is it schools? \p Bridget Phillipson: I do not know whether the right hon. Lady listened to what I just said. It is not coming out of school budgets. [Interruption.] We are investing— \p Lindsay Hoyle: Order. Please—[Interruption.] Order. It is not helpful for the right hon. Member for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott) to speak back at me either—that is completely wrong. And if we are setting educational standards, I do not think this is a good way of doing it. \p Bridget Phillipson: The OBR published projections about SEND costs alongside the Budget. They were hypothetical illustrations, which the right hon. Lady would know if she went away and read the OBR document. The Treasury has been clear that the cost will be covered across overall budgets, but we are investing more in SEND and more in capital. We are delivering for our children and will be setting out further plans for reform next year. If she wants to work with us to get this right, I would be grateful— \p Lindsay Hoyle: Order. Please, we need to get more people in. I call Lauren Edwards.