Christina Manning
Introduction
Christina Manning was a supply teacher on a long-term placement at a Liverpool primary school when she was arrested in June 2019 for driving with alcohol above the legal limit while in charge of a child under seven — offences she was convicted of within a day of charge. The case that reached the Teaching Regulation Agency in January 2022 was not a typical misconduct file: Manning admitted both convictions on agreed facts, had completed an alcohol treatment requirement, counselling, a drink-drive course and a rehabilitation programme, and produced a mentor’s reference describing her work on the New Leaf project. But the panel found a persistent lack of insight into the wider impact of her conduct, and decision maker Sarah Buxcey went beyond the panel’s recommended review period, banning her from teaching indefinitely on 21 January 2022 with no application to set the order aside permitted before 2027. She shares a surname only with Mike Manning, the former Reform UK candidate on this site.
Background Information
Manning was working at Princes Primary School in Liverpool through the Teacher Active supply agency from June 2019, and had been registered as a child minder by Ofsted that April. On 24 June 2019 she was arrested and charged with driving with an alcohol level above the limit, contrary to section 5(1)(a) of the Road Traffic Act 1988, and with being drunk in charge of a child under the age of seven, contrary to section 2 of the Licensing Act 1902. She was convicted at Chester Magistrates’ Court on 25 June 2019, sentenced on 27 July 2019, and had her sentence varied on appeal on 29 July 2019; the panel noted the offences “ultimately led to a sentence of imprisonment, (albeit that it was suspended)”. In her account to the regulator, she had felt increasing anxiety on the day of the arrest and consumed alcohol in an attempt to calm herself, drawing on a relationship with alcohol she had previously developed. The matter was referred to the TRA on 12 November 2019.
The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation
Convicted of driving drunk while in charge of a child under seven, within a day of charge; suspended sentence; banned from teaching with a five-year minimum before any review.
Manning admitted the facts of both offences in her response to the notice of proceedings and in a statement of agreed facts signed on 21 October 2021, and the panel met virtually on 19 January 2022 to decide the case without a hearing. Her mitigation was unusual in its depth: she had completed an alcohol treatment requirement, attended counselling sessions, finished a course for drink-drive offenders, engaged with an exercise programme and a family plan, and completed the rehabilitation activity requirement. The panel read a reference from her mentor at New Leaf — a project aimed at breaking down barriers to employment, training and education — confirming she had “worked extremely hard during her time on New Leaf” and made many positive steps, and a letter from a social worker at Cheshire West & Chester. In a letter to the TRA dated 4 July 2021 she expressed remorse for her actions.
The panel accepted that the offences were serious precisely because of their ingredients — alcohol, a motor vehicle, and responsibility for a young child — and that although the behaviour was not directed at pupils or a school setting, a teacher’s convictions of this kind bear on public confidence in the profession. It found, however, a “lack of insight in relation to the impact upon other individuals and the reputation of the profession as a whole”, and recommended a prohibition order with a two-year review period. Buxcey disagreed with the length: the seriousness of an alcohol-related offence committed while responsible for a young child, and the lack of insight into the wider impact, meant two years was not sufficient, and she imposed a five-year review period instead — Manning may apply to have the order set aside, but not before January 2027, and even then only if a fresh panel agrees.
Public Reaction and Consequences
The consequences for Manning’s working life began immediately: she left her placement after a back-to-work meeting at which she felt her wellbeing had been overlooked, later accepted a new role through the agency, and by her own account enjoyed it — but the regulatory file stayed open for over two years before the January 2022 decision ended her teaching registration indefinitely. No public statement from her school, her agency or Manning herself beyond the regulator’s file is recorded. The case stands apart from the site’s other teaching bans in that no pupil was involved and no institution accused her of workplace misconduct; the ban rests entirely on two criminal convictions from a single day.
Current Status
Christina Manning is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. Unlike the lifetime bans with no review on this site, her order carries a five-year review period: she may apply from January 2027 for the prohibition to be set aside, though the application is not an automatic right and a panel would have to be satisfied the order should lift. Her conviction record — the drink-drive offence and the Licensing Act offence, with a suspended sentence of imprisonment varied on appeal — remains, as does her Ofsted childminder registration history. The decision records no criminal proceedings since 2019.
Impact on Their Career/Life
The case shows the regulator treating a teacher’s private life as professionally load-bearing when children are its casualties: Manning’s offences involved no school and no pupil, but the combination of a teaching registration, an Ofsted childminding registration and a child under seven in her care made the ban, in the decision maker’s judgment, a matter of public confidence. It is also one of the rare decisions where the mitigation is fully documented and still loses to the finding of insufficient insight — the New Leaf reference, the completed treatment requirements and the remorse letter set out in detail, then outweighed. Whether the 2027 review reopens the door depends on insight the panel found absent in 2022.