Matt Hancock (West Suffolk) (Ind) I am not quite sure what to make
of that, Mr Deputy Speaker, but I am honoured to be third today.
Let us see how it goes. It is a pleasure to be here, and to be
clean and well fed. I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a
Second time. “The best way to spread opportunity and reduce
inequality in society is by providing every person with a world
class education”. Those are not my words but the words of my right
hon. Friend the...Request free trial
(West Suffolk) (Ind)
I am not quite sure what to make of that, Mr Deputy Speaker, but
I am honoured to be third today. Let us see how it goes. It is a
pleasure to be here, and to be clean and well fed.
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.
“The best way to spread opportunity and reduce inequality in
society is by providing every person with a world class
education”.
Those are not my words but the words of my right hon. Friend the
Prime Minister. I passionately agree that this should apply to
all, and my Bill represents the next step in turning those strong
words into action.
I am delighted that the Bill has cross-party support. Indeed, its
gestation had support from both sides of the House, including
from my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford and Woodford
Green ( ) and the right hon.
Member for Hayes and Harlington (), and indeed from the hon.
Member for Bury South (), who has sat on both
sides of the House since the Bill was first drafted.
I firmly support the Government’s approach to increasing rigour
and improving standards in our schools, which is at the heart of
this Bill. That drive over a decade is raising standards, and
with raised standards comes raised opportunity and increased hope
for children. We have especially seen improvement in the most
deprived parts of our land.
The Government’s explicit goal is now even greater literacy.
Earlier this year, the then Secretary of State for Education—I
think he was the last Secretary of State but four, but I have
slightly lost count—put 100% literacy at the heart of the schools
White Paper and the special educational needs and disability
review, and he was right to do so. I would be grateful if the
Minister confirmed the Government’s continued support for these
two incredibly important planks of education policy: the schools
White Paper and the SEND review.
There is a gaping hole in the Government’s literacy drive
because, shockingly, just one in five dyslexic children is
identified at school. Those are the Department’s own figures.
When I found that figure in the Rose report of more than 10 years
ago, I asked the Department, through parliamentary questions, for
the updated figure, because I thought one in five was so
shockingly low, but I found that it has not changed over the past
decade. Only one in five dyslexic children is identified at
school.
Without early identification, we will never reach full literacy.
Success in driving up literacy requires us next to support those
who have the most difficulty in increasing their literacy. The
next stage of the education revolution under this Administration
must be to improve opportunities for dyslexic children and for
children with other neurodivergent conditions.
It is estimated that around 10% of people in the UK are dyslexic,
but if we do not know who is dyslexic at school, how can we
possibly help them and equip them with what they need to deal
with the challenges life throws at us? Having been Health
Secretary, I draw this analogy: if a person does not know they
have a heart condition, they cannot get the support to sort it
out. That is at the heart of what we need here, to ensure that we
have early identification. Screening is a standard and valuable
medical intervention. It helps people to live healthy, improved
lives, and so it is with dyslexia.
My Bill would result in every child being screened for dyslexia
at primary school, and it would give teachers adequate training
to teach dyslexic children properly. It is an outrage that,
although every teacher is a teacher of dyslexic children,
teachers currently do not need to be trained to support dyslexic
children. That needs to change, as it leaves thousands of
dyslexic children without the world-class education they have
been promised.
The fact that only one in five children with dyslexia is
identified at school means that many leave school not knowing
they have a specific condition that affects how they translate
the letters on a page into sounds in their head. Instead,
dyslexics up and down the country are called lazy or stupid. The
worst is that that undermines their self-esteem, and the problem
with that is that they label themselves. I was once told, “We
don’t want to label children as dyslexic because they might feel
downtrodden by that,” but I can tell the House from personal
experience that once someone has found out, as a dyslexic, what
the problem is, they can get the support. In my case, when I was
identified as dyslexic aged 18—after I had left school—I then got
the support to essentially relearn how to read, and that allows
me to stand here reading from a little piece of paper while
speaking it out in a way that I simply would not have been able
to before I got that support.
However, it is not only the practical support we need; we also
need to ensure that we know what the problem is. I know, and
dyslexics who have that dyslexia identified know, that the
problem is a specific neurological one of the translation of
letters that wobble around slightly on the page into how that
sounds in your head. It is not that someone is bad at languages
or stupid in some way, and there are still thousands of children
who have labelled themselves as that because they do not get the
identification that they need. That has got to change, and it is
wrong to say that labelling children is a mistake. On the
contrary, ensuring that children know what the problem is gets
them support and helps to improve their self-esteem.
(Christchurch) (Con)
Is it right that some people who have been identified as dyslexic
are able to get particular help—extra time, for example—in taking
their exams? If they are not identified as dyslexic, they will
not be able to take advantage of that.
My hon. Friend brings me immediately on to the next page of my
speech, and I know that he is extremely experienced in work on
these private Members’ Bills on a Friday—so much so that he can
anticipate precisely the next point I was going to make.
The current system is broken, because identification as dyslexic
requires expensive tests that only a few children do, and there
is a strong correlation between being able to access those tests
and the means of one’s parents, the result of which is a much
higher rate of identification in the private school system than
in the state school system. In the state school system, 2.2% of
people are identified as having a special learning need. In the
private school system, 18% have an education and healthcare plan.
The divergence between those two figures cannot possibly be
explained by a difference in the nature of the children; it is
all about access.
In this country for more than 100 years, we have had universal
access to schooling—quite rightly; it is the basis of a fair
society and equality of opportunity—but we do not have equal
access to identification for dyslexia and other neurodivergent
conditions, and as a result it is not just that we have a problem
accessing the extra time that might be appropriate, but we have
an essentially unfair system of allocating that extra time,
because if someone can afford to get the identification, they get
the extra time, and if they cannot afford to, they do not, and
that is a social outrage.
It is not only an issue of morality but an issue of social and
economic justice. I gently make the point, which relates to the
previous Bill, that more than half of prisoners are thought to
have dyslexia, and more than half of successful entrepreneurs are
thought to have dyslexia. If someone is dyslexic, their life can
go two ways. If they get the support they need and become
successful, they often are more creative. There is more lateral
thinking among dyslexics, not least because we think around
problems like how to read something on a page. People who do not
get the support, however, can end up too often in a life of
crime.
The 2012 “Dyslexia Behind Bars” programme found that when
prisoners were taught to read, the reoffending rate dropped by
5.9% within four years. Sadly, as Ofsted and His Majesty’s
inspectorate of prisons reported earlier this year, there has
been no progress in literacy in prisons over the past decade, and
the report was one of the most upsetting I have ever read. A dry
Government document should not be as upsetting as that, and it
describes precisely the problem caused by failing to put in place
the measures in this Bill.
It is not all doom and gloom, though; there is also a massive
opportunity. Dyslexic people tend to have skills that jobs
increasingly need and future jobs need: creativity, lateral
thinking and enhanced communication skills, especially in oral
communication. Computers increasingly do the boring straight-line
thinking; dyslexics have brains fit for the future. It is no
wonder that progressive employers such as GCHQ, Universal Music
and Deloitte proactively hire neurodivergent people. But if
dyslexic people do not know that they have those talents—if they
are not identified and they do not get the support they need—they
cannot make the most of those advantages.
I have one further point on why there might be objections to the
Bill. I have heard some people say that we do not want more false
positives and to over-identify children who are not dyslexic. The
Bill is carefully written to take that into account. It is
calling for screening for all—it is not calling for all to take a
formal test—with the purpose of the screening to get better data.
We have an excellent phonics test in primary schools, which is
good at identifying how good children are at turning phonic
symbols on the page into sounds in their heads, but the measure
of a dyslexic brain is the gap between that capability and
capability at languages.
Most dyslexics are good at oral languages. They have got the gift
of the gab—a bit like me, you might say, Mr Deputy Speaker. If
they are good at that and poor at the phonics test, that
identifies a different problem from being bad at the phonics test
and bad at languages, which requires a different type of support.
I am trying to address that gap. By having a test of language
ability alongside phonic ability in primary school, we will find
those who we know have the intellectual capability and
wherewithal but have just got a specific neurological problem
that means that they need support to get through this barrier.
The Bill would help to address that problem. It would ensure that
the Government have what they need to implement a system that
takes the literacy that we need to see to the next level. If 10%
of children are dyslexic, there is no way that we can reach full
literacy without measures to find out who those children are and
addressing that.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education ()
My right hon. Friend is making an excellent speech, and I thank
him for shining such a bright spotlight on this area and setting
out the opportunities for neurodivergent people. Increasing
educational and employment outcomes is a huge priority for me,
and I know that he is a passionate campaigner. I want to put on
the record my gratitude to him and willingness to work with him
further on this issue.
I am grateful for that willingness—passing the Bill would be a
good starting point. The Minister is also right that there is
good work ongoing, especially in the SEND review. However, the
critical point is early identification and rejection of the false
argument put to me, including by some in her Department, that it
is a bad idea to identify problems. We need more data in the
classroom to know how children work. The best outcome would be
that some children would have dyslexia identified, be given
support and therefore close the gap between their phonic ability
and their language ability just as my gap was closed and I can
now read long words off a piece of paper and read perfectly
effectively to be able to hold down a half-decent job.
(Clwyd South) (Con)
May I say how much I admire the right hon. Gentleman’s campaign
on dyslexia? Could he say a little bit about what happened at the
age of 18 from his own point of view? Why did he not get the
support that he needed before that age? What sparked that? I
think that would be of interest to people.
I am incredibly grateful for that question. I know that others
want to speak about the Bill, but I was fortunate in that I was
okay at maths, so I got to university on my maths. I specialised
in maths-based subjects—maths, physics, computing and
economics—at A-level. I arrived at university to do an
essay-based degree and, by the end of my first term, my tutor, Dr
Michael Hart, at Oxford, took me to one side and said, “You can
talk, but you can’t get it down on paper. You should go and get
identified.” I was lucky because I was at one of the best
universities in the world, and it had a brilliant education
department that essentially retrained my brain in how to read. It
took me back to the phonics, and now I learn each word and look
at a word essentially as a picture, which means that I can read
normal words quite well. I am not that good with brand-new words
and have to concentrate hard to learn them. That gave me the
ability to prosper at university and to succeed afterwards.
It did not stop all the screw-ups—I have some terrible stories of
errors, including when I wrote an election address for the former
Member for Guildford in the 2001 election, and managed
accidentally to write in very large letters across the front, “I
want to untie the community”. I intended to say, “I want to unite
the community”. Unfortunately, we only discovered the error when
the election address had landed on the 40,000 mats. The former
Member for Guildford, who is here no longer, is still my friend.
My dyslexia has continued to cause some problems for me—it caused
a problem for him, but I hope that he has forgiven me.
I want to put on record my thanks to the British Dyslexia
Association and to Made by Dyslexia, which campaigns to explain
the benefits of dyslexic thinking, and to Neurodiversity in
Business, which campaigns for businesses to open their minds to
people who think differently. These are superb campaigning
organisations, but more needs to happen. The choice is very
simple. We must not leave generations of dyslexic children
without identification or the support they deserve. We can back
this Bill and end systemic discrimination against neurodivergent
children in our education system. If hon. Members, like me, care
about every child actually receiving a world-class education,
there is no good reason to reject this Bill.
For decades, Governments of all colours have failed dyslexic
children and put this issue in the “too difficult” box. Today we
have the opportunity to right that wrong. This Bill will improve
literacy, increase economic growth and reduce crime. Now is the
time to stop talking and start delivering.
2.21pm
(Warwick and Leamington)
(Lab)
Let me start by saying how good it is to see the right hon.
Member for West Suffolk () here in the flesh. He may
have felt at home in the last few weeks among late-career pop
stars and soap legends, but what he is hoping to do here is far
more important. I thought he was very cool in channelling his
inner Arnie, although I am not sure that he’ll be back—that may
be one for the Government. In all seriousness, I know that the
topic of this Bill is close to his heart. He has campaigned long
and hard to raise awareness of dyslexia and neurodivergent
conditions. As was made clear earlier, his campaign is as much a
personal one as a political one. For that, I commend him.
The British Dyslexia Association, as the right hon. Gentleman
said, estimates that between 10% to 15% of UK people are
dyslexic, while around 6% suffer from dyscalculia. We are all
committed to ensuring that neurodivergence should not hold
children back from achieving their potential. With early
intervention and the right support through their education,
children with dyslexia can succeed at school. Yet, all too often,
lack of access to diagnosis and support creates multiple
problems. An estimated four in five young people leave school
with dyslexia unidentified, thinking that they just find reading
and writing hard. That can hold back pupils’ grades, particularly
in exam-based assessment, and affect their confidence and mental
health. We need to prioritise earlier intervention and quicker
support, as the right hon. Member said.
Those with dyslexia clearly feel different from their peers. Many
dyslexic children show strength in lateral thinking and creative
skills. It is vital that those skills are nurtured and encouraged
alongside the additional support that children need with their
reading and writing. Steve Jobs, Stephen Hawking and Abraham
Lincoln were all recorded as having dyslexia. Their individual
contributions were immense, despite being outliers and often
going it alone.
Teachers and school staff across the country work hard all year
round to support their students, but a staggering 59% of teachers
believe that there is no appropriate training in place for all
teachers to support pupils with SEND. I understand the right hon.
Gentleman’s efforts to try to change the statute book to address
this glaring deficiency in our education system for
neurodivergent children, but I wonder if additional legislation
is necessary in this form. I sense that, perhaps with more
engagement with Opposition Members and with the Department for
Education, he could have sought to focus his energy on reforming
the system as it stands, but more broadly.
Labour is just as committed to this agenda as the right hon.
Gentleman is. Indeed, our national excellence programme, funded
by ending the tax breaks for private schools, would provide a
£210 million teacher development fund. It would ensure that
teachers have access to appropriate ongoing training for SEND,
including dyslexia, at every stage of their career, through
existing channels. Although Labour supports the underlying thrust
of this Bill and sympathises with its aims, we believe that this
is better delivered through trainee teacher continuous
professional development programmes. That will allow trainee
teachers to develop an understanding and awareness of a range of
neurodivergent conditions, not just limited to dyslexia. With
that in mind, and without wishing to delay the House further, it
is worth asking the Minister what steps she is taking to ensure
that the principle behind the Bill is noted in the improvement
plan for SEND Green Paper. As I am sure the right hon. Gentleman
and other hon. Members will be aware, the Government had
committed to publishing the improvement plan by the end of the
year but have since delayed it until after the new year. So will
the Minister indicate when she expects it to be published, given
the stresses that many parents of SEND pupils have to cope with
in the current SEND system?
Many of the harrowing cases I hear about in my constituency
surgeries—this is weekly—involve people who are worried about the
SEND system as it currently operates. We should all feel an
imperative to break down the administrative hurdles making the
lives of parents and neurodivergent children and pupils harder.
For that reason, although I admire the right hon. Gentleman’s
attempts to bring this legislation through—like him and so many
others, my brother suffered greatly through a lack of early
diagnosis—I do not believe this Bill is the answer in the way it
currently sits. What is needed is better diagnosis across all
education and all neurodivergent conditions. We believe that that
can be done through continuous professional development. So along
with my Labour colleagues, I look forward to seeing how the Bill
develops and to hearing from the Minister.
2.26pm
(Thurrock) (Con)
It is with great pleasure that I rise to support this private
Member’s Bill from my right hon. Friend the Member for West
Suffolk (). When I had the pleasure of
serving with him in the Department of Health and Social Care, we
had a shared objective of making services deliver better for
people with neurodiverse conditions. We still have a long way to
go on that journey, but I say to the Minister that this Bill will
go a long way to helping do that. We have heard that as many as
10% of the population are dyslexic, but only one in five of them
is diagnosed. For the other four in five, every day in school is
a misery. They are made to feel stupid because their brain does
not work the same as everyone else’s, yet their education is
completely driven by everyone else’s experience. That misery
leads them to fall out of school. As he has said, half of the
prison population is comprised of people who have suffered with
dyslexia, yet with diagnosis they can be equipped with the tools
that enable them to realise that they are not stupid and that
their brain just works differently from everyone else’s, and they
can get on and become a great success. They have other skills and
the fact that their brain works differently means we can better
utilise their skillset. I will say no more, because we have just
got time to say yes to this Bill. So please, Minister, give us
all an early Christmas present and back this Bill.
2.28pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education ()
I am over the moon to be here discussing such important issues.
As the Minister for special educational needs, and having served
briefly as the Minister for disabled people, I want to start by
congratulating my right hon. Friend the Member for West Suffolk
() on introducing a Bill on this
important issue. Having heard from people from across the House,
I think we can agree that we have to work tirelessly to improve
the outcomes for children and young people with SEND. I want to
make sure that the decisions we take are well-informed and
evidence-driven. I was asked about the SEND Green Paper. We have
set out our ambition to respond to that early next year, and I am
very committed to doing so. We will be looking at some of the
questions we have talked about today, to make sure we can get the
early identification right, so that people are getting the help
they need when they need it; to make sure we are getting the
teacher training right, so that people are getting the right
support from the right teachers; and to make sure that we are
setting out a series of standards so that at each point of the
process those children, their families, and their teachers and
schools can see what they should be getting and how they should
be helped. We are incredibly ambitious about literacy and making
sure we can achieve the targets that we have set out, and we will
be working to do so not only through the measures in the Bill but
throughout the Department. I shall be happy to work with my right
hon. Friend on this issue. Now we can ensure that all our
ambitious programmes are working together to deliver for young
people with dyslexia—
2.30pm
The debate stood adjourned (Standing Order No. 11(2)).
Ordered, That the debate be resumed on Friday 3 March 2023.
|
