The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice (Baroness Levitt) (Lab)

- View Speech - Hansard -

Copy Link

- - Excerpts

My Lords, I thank noble Lords for the positive and constructive debate on this important subject, and I congratulate my noble friend Lord Bach on bringing forward the Bill. I have been particularly struck by the emphasis of all those who spoke, including the noble Earl, on the fact that these are children and not just mini criminals.

It is the sad reality, however, that a small number of children commit offences so serious that there is no option other than to deprive them of their liberty in order to protect the public. It is the Government’s responsibility to ensure that these children receive appropriate support in order to prepare them for their eventual release. We want to go further and ensure that when they leave a custodial setting, they are in a position to make a better life for themselves.

Secure 16 to 19 academies, also known as secure schools, offer an opportunity to transform the experience of children who are detained by the state, having been sentenced or remanded in custody by the courts, giving them the opportunity to gain skills and qualifications which will enable them to return to the community and lead successful and crime-free lives, thus protecting the public from them reoffending in the future. This is part of the route for damaged children—damaged usually through no fault of their own—to lead a better life, which is better for children and better for the public.

As noble Lords have observed, secure schools were already established by the Academies Act 2010, and the previous Government deserve credit for that. This Bill is necessary to ensure specific provisions in the Act are relevant to these new custodial settings. The Government support the Bill because these amendments will create better services and thus strengthen the impact of secure schools on the lives of those children within our justice system.

I turn briefly to why we need secure schools. The good news is that, as the noble Lord, Lord Bates, said, the number of children in custody under the age of 18 has fallen drastically in recent years. He said 80%. I wish I could agree with that—the figure may be a little lower, at 60%—but the point is still an important one. That is 60% fewer children in custody than there were a decade ago. I say that is good news because this Government agree with the last—that we should deprive children of their liberty only as a last resort. This decline in numbers has rightly been commended as a success of the youth justice system.

However, for children who commit the most serious crimes, there is often no alternative but to protect the public by detaining them in custody. These children, now in custody, are among the most complex and vulnerable in society. They also present with very challenging behaviour, and the majority have committed offences of violence. It is a sad and depressing fact that children leaving custody have some of the highest reoffending rates in the justice system. The latest statistics show that 66% of children released from custody go on to reoffend within a year.

The children in custody are much more likely than their peers to have had a disrupted education. Government analysis shows around 90% of children sentenced to custody had a record of persistent absence. This means these children have lost out on months or years of learning. As the noble Lord, Lord Bates, said, many of them have not been at school for the last years that they were required to be there, and therefore they have lost out on that.

The evidence is clear about the importance of education as a factor preventing children offending. Secure schools offer an opportunity for these children to re-engage with education and to make the most of their potential. The secure school model has been developed in accordance with the best available evidence for what works in addressing the underlying causes of youth offending. That is why secure schools will offer children small environments, as homelike as can be achieved, with healthcare and education at their heart. As has already been said by others, including by the noble Lord, Lord Bates, these are not “prisons with education”; they are primarily schools, but within a protective, secure environment.

In them, children and young people will engage with integrated care, health and education services, which—most importantly—will be tailored to their individual needs. On entry, each young person has a full assessment of their needs, which will establish a baseline against which progress is measured and ensure that any hitherto unmet health and special educational needs are identified.

As the noble Lord, Lord Addington, said, many studies, including recent reports, have shown that, among children in the youth justice system, a disproportional number have special educational needs or are neurodivergent. Each child will therefore receive a personalised programme to build on their strengths and develop their potential, with the use of evidence-based interventions to help them build resilience and develop vital life and social skills to help them in the future. Education will take place in appropriately sized groups, including one-to-one where needed.

Children in secure schools have the opportunity to make educational progress on a par with their peers in mainstream schools, but, self-evidently, that will have to be proportionate to the length of their sentence. Secure schools work closely with youth offending teams, education, health and other community service providers, as well as young people’s families where appropriate. Planning for resettlement will start when a young person enters a secure school and be adapted to support transition to the adult estate where appropriate.

I turn briefly to why the Government support the Bill. Secure schools are a key reform in youth custody that best fit the evidence of what works to reduce reoffending and, ultimately, to protect the public by ensuring that there are fewer victims of youth crime. As noble Lords have heard, the first secure school was opened in August 2024. Your Lordships’ House will be aware—the noble Lord, Lord Bates, and the right reverend Prelate alluded to this—that, unfortunately, the school is temporarily closed while repairs are being made to a number of doors on the site to ensure the children’s safety. We take this matter extremely seriously, and officials are working as hard as possible so that the site can reopen in early 2026.

I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Bates, and the noble Earl for their acknowledgment that these early problems do not invalidate the whole system; they are issues from which the Government can and will learn to ensure that, when this is rolled out further, they will not be replicated. These early operational issues do not detract from the need to ensure that we have the most effective legislative basis for secure schools to operate in the future. By ensuring that secure schools function well, with proportionate termination measures and efficient processes for opening new schools, we can achieve that goal.

As my noble friend Lord Bach said, through the Bill we have an opportunity to enable government to prioritise value for money for the taxpayer while having more flexibility should there be any need to terminate a funding agreement with a secure school provider. As other noble Lords have pointed out, engagement with local communities is a key part of the Ministry of Justice selection procedure for new custodial sites. Should there be a need to open new custodial sites, that will be dealt with through the normal planning procedure. The point is that we will be able to talk about how the delivery is managed rather than whether the site should be opened at all. I take on board the right reverend Prelate’s observations about the importance of faith communities.

This Bill will give providers the opportunity to engage with their local community, ensuring a more constructive consultation process that will seek to consult on how the secure school should work with local partners. The noble Lord, Lord Bates, asked about the cost of that. I am afraid that I do not have the figures with me but will, if I may, write to him with them.

I reiterate my thanks to my noble friend Lord Bach for bringing the Bill before the House. I thank the noble Earl for the characteristic generosity and good humour in his response from the Opposition Benches. I confirm, with great pleasure, that the Government support this important Bill, and I look forward to its passage through this House. I urge colleagues across the House to give it their full support.