Sharon has welcomed a cross-party, multi-organisation campaign led by Bite The Ballot to increase voter registration the same week that Labour Party figures show that over 1200 electors in Washington and Sunderland West have dropped off the electoral register – a percentage total of 1.8%.

This drop off is down to the current Conservative Government’s plans which brought forward by 12 months the full implementation of Individual Voter Registration (IER), which took place on December 1^st 2015. These figures come the same week as Bite The Ballot’s ‘National Voter Registration Drive 2016’-  a cross-party, multi-organisation campaign to increase voter registration.

Labour support the move to IER, but opposed the decision to bring forward the implementation due to concerns that earlier implementation would lead to a large number of people falling off the register and instead called for a transitional period with strong safeguards that would have mitigated against any damage to the electoral register.

Late last year, Labour led a national campaign to highlight the changes and make sure people were registered to vote register ahead of the move to IER last December and has called on the Government to issue guidance to make it easier for universities, local authorities, electoral registration offices and other Government agencies to work together to ensure no-one is disenfranchised from voting in elections.

In reaction to the drop off figures, Sharon said:

“It is concerning that in Washington and Sunderland West there has been a drop of over 1200 electors from the electoral register, which included as part of the national picture marks the biggest disenfranchisement in our history.

“Labour opposed the plans to bring forward the changes to voter registration for these exact reasons, and campaigned at the end of last year to make sure people were registered to vote and instead wanted to see a transitional period with strong safeguards to mitigate against this drop-off.

“With local elections coming up in May along with an expected EU Referendum in the summer it is important, now more than ever, that people are registered to vote and don’t lose out on exercising their democratic right and I welcome the week-long voter registration drive being led by Bite The Ballot to ensure people can cast their vote on polling day.”

ENDS

Make sure you are registered to vote by visiting the gov.uk website here.

It only takes a few minutes and all you need is your National Insurance Number.

Caption: Sharon meeting here with Thomas Crawford, Rachel Krajovska and Luwam Habte of the Sunderland Youth Parliament.

Sharon Hodgson speaking in the Backbench Business Debate on the Government's upcoming Childhood Obesity Strategy - 21st January 2016

Image copyright Parliamentary Recording Unit 2016

As Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for School Food, Sharon spoke about the need for school food to be seen as an integral part of the Government's upcoming Childhood Obesity Strategy by looking at the evidence already out there of the benefits of a healthy school meal, especially one that is free, along with addressing child holiday hunger - which has become a growing problem in the UK in recent years. 

Read Sharon's speech in Hansard here: Sharon Hodgson Childhood Obesity Strategy Debate 2016

Text pasted below:

Read Sharon's latest Sunderland Echo column below or find the published column on the Sunderland Echo's website.

Since Parliament’s return, much of our time has been dominated by consideration of the Government’s Housing and Planning Bill.

This Bill has been forced through Parliament in order that the Government can continue their short-sighted strategy on housing which will only lead to a spiralling housing crisis.

On our first day back, MPs found the Government had shoe-horned in a vast number of amendments to the Bill, which saw MPs voting on amendments as late as 2am. These new amendments totalled over 60 pages – the largest number of amendments tabled that we have seen on a piece of legislation in recent Parliamentary history.

Despite these many amendments, they have yet to improve the Bill and help provide any affordable and adequate housing. Some of our main concerns with this Bill, included: the lack of support for families and young people aspiring to get on to the property ladder; the forced selling off of council and social housing stock, and; the failure to address the need for landlords to maintain their rental properties at a liveable standard for tenants.

Housing is an important part of any future infrastructure plans in the UK, and that is why it is vital that this Bill must be used to addresses the lack of affordable housing in the UK and so it doesn’t mean we only come back to these issues in later years finding more and more people are living in squalid, over-priced housing.

That is why it was deeply concerning when an amendment to the Bill was put forward that proposes to increase the threshold to be eligible for discount on starter homes to £450,000 in London and £250,000 outside of London.

As a former top civil servant at the Department for Communities and Local Government has said, this new definition of starter homes stretches the definition of affordable housing to breaking point.

Though Labour supports more home ownership, as was seen under the last Labour Government, it is concerning, as Shelter has found, that families on the Government’s new national living wage in 98% of local authorities would not be able to own a starter home, including many areas of the North-East. The Government’s new starter homes scheme will only help those on high-earning salaries and not those on low or middle incomes.

Again and again, the Government has shown that they do not understand the housing crisis we currently face and instead have pushed ahead with their ideological agenda which will not fix the situation, only make it worse.

At Prime Minister’s Questions on 13^th January 2016, Sharon pressed the Prime Minister to reconsider the decision by the Energy Secretary last year to scrap Renewables Obligation Certificates which will be detrimental to the planned investment of £3 million for the windfarm at the Nissan Factory at the Turbine Industrial Park in Sunderland.

Image copyright Parliamentary Recording Unit 2016

This comes ahead of the House of Commons debating the 2^nd Reading of the Government’s Energy Bill on Monday 18^th January 2016, where the general principles of the Bill will be debated.

Sharon called on the Prime Minister to rectify the decision from last year and the negative effect this will have on pro-green businesses, like Nissan.

An amendment to introduce a ‘grace period’ for projects already in the pipeline was rejected when the Energy Bill was considered in the House of Lords, but there are now moves to see this amendment re-introduced during the Commons’ stages of the Bill. 

The full exchange between Sharon and the Prime Minister can be seen below, or read here in the Official Hansard.

In her question to the Prime Minister, Sharon asked:

Last year the Energy Secretary scrapped support under the Renewables Obligation for new onshore wind projects, which will impact the £3 million investment by Nissan at their windfarm in my constituency. Does the Prime Minister realise that his attacks on clean energy are detrimental to pro-green businesses, like Nissan, and will he look into this immediately and rectify it in the Energy Bill next week?

To which the Prime Minister responded:

We had extensive exchanges about this in the Liaison Committee yesterday, and I can tell the hon. Lady that we are going to see another 50% increase in onshore wind investment during this Parliament. Also, Britain has the biggest offshore wind market anywhere in the world. The Leader of the Opposition raised the question of solar. Britain has the fourth largest solar installation of any country anywhere in the world. Indeed, my new favourite statistic is that 98% of those solar panels have been installed since I was Prime Minister. This is all good news, and it means that we have a genuine claim to be leading a renewables revolution. However, every single subsidy that is given to these technologies is extra money that we put on to people’s bills, making their energy more expensive. So it is right that we seek a balance between decarbonising our economy and making sure we do it at a low cost to our consumers and the people who pay the bills. That is what our policy is all about.

Commenting after the Prime Minister’s response, Sharon said:

“The Prime Minister again has used his hot-air rhetoric to deflect from the arguments regarding the future of clean energy here in the UK and has ignored the wealth of support from pro-green businesses, such as Nissan here in Sunderland to invest in clean energy.

“With businesses, like Nissan, wanting to invest in the future of our energy infrastructure and security, it is concerning that the Prime Minister and his ministers have scrapped support that will be detrimental to this investment.

“That is why in the upcoming Energy Bill, I hope that Government ministers will seriously reconsider their short-sighted actions that will affect businesses, consumers and our environment alike.”

Read Sharon Hodgson MP's report - News from Westminster - Dec 2015 to Jan 2016 - number 81.

Welcome to my online monthly report - News from Westminster - which details some of the highlights from Westminster and the constituency.

Sharon Hodgson MP's report - News from Westminster - Dec 2015 to Jan 2016 - number 81

Sharon Hodgson speaking in the Backbench Business Debate on Children in Care - 7th January 2016

Image copyright Parliamentary Recording Unit 2016

As Shadow Children's Minister, Sharon spoke on behalf of the frontbench on how best we can help prevent children entering the care system and keep families together through better early intervention and prevention programmes and more support on offer to kinship carers, extended family members who look after children. 

Read Sharon's speech in Hansard here: Sharon Hodgson MP Children in Care Debate 2016

Text pasted here:

4.40 pm

Mrs Sharon Hodgson (Washington and Sunderland West) (Lab): I thank the hon. Member for Telford (Lucy Allan) for securing this debate. It has been a short, but very thoughtful one. Our attention has rightly been focused on how we can best help and support struggling families and prevent children from entering the care system.

This debate is timely, given the research published at the end of last year by the University of Lancaster. The research found that one in four women return to the family court after previously having a child removed by court order, and that the number of new-born babies subject to care proceedings has doubled during the past five years. Those findings are backed by the Department for Education’s own figures, which show that the number of children in care has reached its highest since 1985. The total population of children now in the care system is 69,450.

The significant increase in the number of children entering the care system is seen by many, including the Education Committee’s report on child protection in 2012, as a reaction to the tragic death of Baby P in 2008. That is supported by figures showing that the majority of children enter care due to neglect or abuse. This tells us that more must be done to support parents at the earliest opportunity to avoid situations such as those of Daniel Pelka, Baby P and the many other high-profile cases about which we have heard in recent years.

We must have a serious rethink about the current strategy to support families and about how the huge social, personal and economic costs of children going into care can be avoided. Although it cannot be denied that there are circumstances in which the best-case scenario for a child may be to be taken into care, based on the risks of remaining in the family home, that does not mean that we as a society should not feel ashamed of this failure to support all families.

There are two areas that the Government must consider when it comes to reducing the number of children entering the care system—a more comprehensive early intervention and prevention strategy, and improving the support on offer to kinship carers.

There is an old African proverb with which I am sure all hon. Members are familiar: it takes a whole village to raise a child. That reminds us of our collective duty to offer support and help to those families who need it the most. When abuse and neglect are cited as the main reasons for a child being taken into care, it is clear that comprehensive early intervention and prevention programmes are needed to reduce the threat of a child’s abuse or neglect in the family home and to avoid the eventuality of a child being taken into care.

Addressing issues about nurture and early family life is championed in “The 1001 Critical Days” manifesto. The all-party group of much the same name is steered passionately by the hon. Member for East Worthing and Shoreham (Tim Loughton). He was in the Chamber earlier, but he is not in his place at the moment. The manifesto calls for more support to be given to families to help nurture and support a healthy family environment for children to grow up in. I hope that the Minister has had the chance to read this excellent manifesto. If not, I am sure his hon. Friend will send him a copy of it forthwith.

A National Audit Office report in 2014 cites one of the previous Labour Government’s greatest achievements, Sure Start children’s centres, as a key measure to help to reduce the number of children entering care. The family-focused vision of Sure Start centres brings together specialists, professionals and practitioners to provide parents with vital information on how to overcome the struggles of being new parents and how to cope with challenging family circumstances in order that they do not fall apart and descend into situations in which a child may be removed from the family home. However, according to an investigation last year by the Children’s Society and the National Children’s Bureau, cuts to Whitehall budgets have meant that overall spending on early intervention programmes has fallen by 55%, or £1.8 billion, since 2010.

The short-sightedness of cutting early intervention budgets is detrimental to the vision all hon. Members share, but which was laid out full well in “Early Intervention: The Next Steps”, the seminal report from 2011 by my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham North (Mr Allen). He highlighted the top 19 intervention programmes as a blueprint for government. The top of the list was the excellent family nurse partnership programme, which was piloted and which has since been rolled out a little—it needs to go much further to become universal.

Since 2010, almost 800 Sure Start children’s centres have closed. Many more are mere shells of their former selves—the “caretaker and bottle of bleach” model, as I like to call it, means that they are classed as open but not quite as we know it. The Government are sifting through the responses to their consultation into the future of Sure Start centres. In the light of the lack of progress since the my hon. Friend’s report, it is concerning that the hollowing out of Sure Start centres and the devastating cuts to intervention programmes that families rely on, such as parenting classes, drug and alcohol abuse support, and domestic violence services, have not been cited as causes when trying to understand the increase in children entering the care system.

Although a push for greater early intervention schemes is vital to addressing the increase in children entering the care system, there will still be situations when children must, sadly, be removed from the family home for their own safety. When a child is placed into care, all efforts must be made to ensure that they are safely placed with extended family members in a kinship care arrangement where possible, instead of within the care system.

It is estimated that 200,000 children are being raised by kinship carers across the UK. A significant number of children are being looked after by their grandparents or other relatives, but there has been little development in Government support for kinship carers that mirrors, for instance, recent announcements on adoption. Allowing a family member to care for a child instead of that child going into residential or foster care is important for the development of the child, but it can also help to reduce the strain on local children’s services, the budgets of which have been devastated by cuts. That does not mean that kinship carers should be seen as a cheaper option for providing care to children but, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle (Alan Johnson) made clear in his speech, kinship carers save the country millions upon millions of pounds by providing care to their kin.

Many kinship carers become so due to emergency circumstances, which means that the costs for raising that child, such as the immediate cost of providing a bed for the child to sleep in, clothes to wear and uniform for school, are not factored in to their household budgets. That is exacerbated when kinship carers must give up their jobs to look after their kin. The largest survey of kinship carers last year found that 49% of respondents had to give up work permanently. An analysis of the 2011 census found that 76% of children living in kinship care were living in deprived households.

The lack of joined-up thinking is laid bare when the same kinship carers who were told to give up their jobs are chased by the Department for Work and Pensions or ATOS and sanctioned for not looking for work, as my right hon. Friend said. I am gravely concerned about how both kinship and foster carers will fare when the Government’s proposed two-child policy comes into force. I echo what he said and plead with the Minister for exemptions for both kinship and foster carers if that policy goes ahead. That is why it is so important that the Government explore how the financial costs of being a kinship carer can be alleviated by allowing better access to funds and entitlements that are already available to adopted or foster children, who share similar adversities to children in kinship care, so that their development is not hindered or regressed.

The Government must also look at the process of placing a child with a kinship carer. Although new guidance for local authorities published last year is helpful in calling for more identification of potential family carers, there is still no statutory duty on local authorities to explore those options. That means that many local authorities look into kinship care only after a child is placed in the care system, causing avoidable upheaval for the child and the extended family.

There is a duty on all of us to ensure that every child, no matter what their circumstances, has a safe and nurturing home in which to spend their childhood. However, that is clearly not the case for tens of thousands of children who are currently in care, but who could have avoided entering the system in the first place. Continuing to fail those children is not an option. We cannot fail them; we are their village and we need to help raise them. I hope that the Minister realises that this is his moment to really make a difference to the lives of some of the most vulnerable children in our society. I hope that he makes it count.

4.50 pm

Sharon Hodgson MP is looking to recruit a temporary, part-time Parliamentary Office Assistant to join her team in the Westminster Office. 

*PLEASE NOTE THAT THE DEADLINE HAS PASSED FOR THIS JOB ADVERT AND NO APPLICATIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED NOW*

The successful candidate will join a hard-working team supporting the work of the Shadow Minister for Children and MP for Washington and Sunderland West.

The salary offered will be in line with the IPSA Pay Scale.

They will be responsible for assisting with the successful running of a busy Parliamentary office, together with two full-time members of staff. Duties will include: 

• Dealing with and monitoring incoming telephone and visitor enquiries, responding to e-mails and letters, efficient data and file management;
• Opening and dispatching mail;
• Drafting political responses to constituent letters, and keeping records on the CFL Caseworker database;
• Undertaking photocopying, scanning and formatting of documents;
• Assisting with the running of All Party Parliamentary Groups (APPG);
• Ensuring office records are kept and an efficient filing system is in place and up to date;
• Adhering to the Data Protection Act principles and respecting the confidentiality of data at all times;
• Liaising on behalf of Member with relevant groups/personnel at Westminster and within the Constituency, including liaison with outside organisations and the general public;
• Performing other duties as and when required.

Knowledge of Computer for Labour programmes as well as Microsoft Office would be an advantage, but training can be provided. Previous experience of working for a Labour politician would also be beneficial, but is not essential.

This post is temporary, part-time (20 hours from Mon - Thurs) for six months.

Upon appointment you will be required to comply with the Baseline Personnel Security Standard, undertaken by the Members’ Staff Verification Office (MSVO). See www.w4mp.org/html/msvo/main.asp for further info.

The deadline for application is the 28th January 2016. Interviews will take place on Thursday 4th February, with an anticipated start date for the successful candidate during March, to be confirmed with the successful candidate. If you anticipate a problem with either the interview or start dates, please make this clear when you apply. 

To apply, please send a short covering letter (maximum 1 side of A4) and CV (maximum of 2 sides of A4) to [xxxxx] with the subject line: POA Vacancy 2016.

Read Sharon's latest Sunderland Echo column below or find the published column on the Sunderland Echo's website.

With Christmas around the corner, we are all getting into the full swing of the festivities this holiday season has to offer by visiting extended family we don’t get to see during the rest of the year, celebrating the end of the year with neighbours and work colleagues or just simply cosying up with a classic festive movie with our nearest and dearest on a cold winter’s night.

In the battle of the Christmas adverts, John Lewis, this year in partnership with Age UK, may not have been the tear-jerker of previous years but it did pack a punch in highlighting an issue that many of us forget when surrounded by our loved ones during the festive season: loneliness. 

Loneliness can affect us all. This is more pertinent as we get older, with over one million older people saying they go without speaking to a friend, family member or neighbour for a month.

During the Christmas holidays, loneliness can be even harder to bear for older people who may have no loved ones around them with little, or no, festive celebrations to enjoy.

That is why it was so heart-warming to see one of the most high-profile and highly-anticipated adverts of the season highlight this important issue.

There is something we can all do this Christmas to support ending loneliness and end the perception that it is a normal part of ageing.

This includes putting pressure on the Government to consider loneliness as a public health problem that can be prevented and tackled.

If you support this, then you can sign Age UK’s petition on their website www.ageuk.org.uk/no-one

Tackling loneliness shouldn’t be just down to Government alone.

As individuals, we can do our own little bit to tackle loneliness, from a simple smile and a season’s greeting to an elderly neighbour you see walking down the street, to getting in touch with older relatives through a phone-call or a visit, or supporting our local Age UK here in Sunderland that works to help older people to enjoy the festive period.

That’s why when tucking into our dinner on Christmas Day or opening the next bottle of wine at the Christmas party, we must never forget those who will go lonely this Christmas and should pledge to do whatever we can, big or small, to make loneliness a thing of the past in 2016.

Sharon has given her support to the relaunch of a cross-party manifesto that highlights the importance of acting early to enhance the outcomes for children.

Sharon has joined a wide-group of Members of Parliament from eight different parties who have thrown their support behind the relaunch of a key policy commitment to achieving better perinatal mental health and stronger attachment between babies, and their parents, right from the start.

The ‘1001 Critical Days Manifesto’ was launched in the last Parliament, when Sharon also supported the manifesto, and called for all political parties to incorporate their recommendations in their manifestos.

The 1001 Critical Days Manifesto takes its title from the period from conception to age 2 when a baby’s brain is developing fastest, and he or she is most susceptible to forming strong bonds of attachment with a primary carer, which will have lasting impact and certainly set a child up for the best start in life, in school and into adulthood.

As part of the relaunch, Sharon and other Members of Parliament are pressing Government ministers to adopt the manifesto’s pledges as policy across a number of Whitehall departments steered by the Department for Health.

Other parliamentarians supporting the manifesto, include: Tim Loughton MP, Norman Lamb MP, and Caroline Lucas MP.

Many of the social problems seen in society today are results of poor parenting skills often as a result of a parent having had a bad experience as a baby and creating a generational downward spiral.

The goal of the manifesto is for every baby to receive sensitive, appropriate and responsive care from their main caregivers in the first years of life with more proactive help from public bodies, like the NHS and children’s centres, in a joined-up preventative strategy that supports the greatest change and outcomes in a child’s life.

The new manifesto draws attention to statistics that show around 26% of babies (198,000) in the UK are estimated to be living within complex family situation, of heightened risk where there are problems with substance misuse, mental health or domestic violence, whilst 36% of serious case reviews involve a baby under the age of one.

Following the relaunch of the manifesto, Sharon said:

“It is fantastic to see the 1001 Critical Days manifesto relaunched in this Parliament with more Members of Parliament than ever before offering their support to raise awareness of the need to help parents in the first 1001 days of their baby’s life.

“The lack of early intervention policy by the Government to support parents and their babies in complex situations can lead to issues further down to the line, including around a child’s health, education, brain development and behaviour, and especially into adulthood and the costs incurred on the taxpayer when these issues could have been addressed at an early stage.

“That is why it is important that families are offered and provided with the necessary help at the earliest opportunity to end the generational cycle of disadvantage and I hope the Government will seriously listen to these concerns.”