Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Maya Ellis (Ribble Valley) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered Government support for healthy relationships.
It is a pleasure to be under your chairship, Ms Jardine. May I start by wishing you a happy Valentine’s day for Saturday?
“It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife.”
That is probably the most famous line in British literature, but when it comes to British policy, the role of relationships seems too often to be an afterthought, yet they are the building block of a healthy society. I am the first to jump on our cultural obsession with relationships when there is a new “Bridgerton” season, but it is time that relationships became a political obsession, too.
Valentine’s day is a moment each year when the country reflects on love, partnership and the relationships that underpin our families, communities and society. With public interest high in the pressures facing modern couples and with a growing body of evidence that respect, trust and equality prevent relationship breakdown, this debate offers us a timely opportunity to consider the factors that enable healthy partnerships in Britain today.
Healthy relationships are fundamental to a number of key policy domains. Strong and stable partnerships are associated with improved mental wellbeing, reduced loneliness and better overall health outcomes, while relationship distress is linked to increased demand for NHS and social care services. In education and children’s services, the quality of parental relationships strongly influences children’s emotional development, attainment and long-term life chances. In the economy, relationship stability and equality affect workforce participation, financial security and the capacity of families to balance work and care. In efforts to tackle violence against women and girls, healthy norms, cultures and values are clearly fundamental.
Policy decisions across those and other areas have a significant impact on couples’ abilities to build and sustain equal, healthy relationships. Workplace policies, such as parental leave and access to flexible working, shape how families organise care and employment. Housing affordability and security influence relationship formation and stability. Mental health provision, early years support and the wider social safety net all play a role in reducing pressures that constrain partnerships, while legal and justice frameworks affect how society responds to abuse, coercive control and family breakdown.
The fact is that relationships today look entirely different from those just 20 years ago. Today, more than two thirds of families with dependent children have both parents in employment, meaning that the majority of households are dual income. With divorce well entrenched in our culture, one in four families with dependent children is a single-parent household. There are huge benefits to more people working, especially for women, and it is a good thing that people have access to divorce when relationships are not healthy, but we cannot just take the benefits of these improvements and not mitigate the impacts.
What happens to child development when both parents are working full time, or when a single parent has no capacity outside work and childcare? What happens to our ability to bond with each other as a couple in a romantic relationship? What happens to our capacity to engage in and contribute to our local communities? Those shifts in the roles of couples and households also have negative impacts on relationships. We could mitigate those impacts, but as yet we have struggled to do so. This Government are rightly focused on growth as the key way this country can get back to a time of prosperity, but most parents I know—bear in mind that parents make up a huge part of the working population—are exhausted, and if I know one thing as a parent of small children, it is that nothing good or productive comes of being exhausted. How can we expect great output and productivity from people in the workplace when the strain on couples is so high? We have to pay closer attention to how households are coping.
Relationship challenges impact not only what we produce in the workplace, but how we sustain our population. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education has recently highlighted our falling birth rate and has rightly highlighted actions taken by this Government to try to change that, such as better funded childcare and measures on the cost of living and housing. Couples are operating under unprecedented strain to both parent or care and to work full time, yet we barely talk about the psychological toll. Then we are surprised that domestic violence rates increase, that mental health in both men and women is plummeting and adding to our welfare bill, that special educational needs and disabilities issues are skyrocketing and that couples are deciding that one child is enough. As a Government, we give couples screen time advice and encourage them to have more children, but we rarely ask, “What is life like for you right now, and what would make your life easier as a couple and as a parent in 2026?” Let us do that more.
When it comes to domestic violence, the Government have made huge strides in developing a comprehensive strategy to combat violence against women and girls, but the fact remains that 3.8 million people experienced domestic abuse last year, and a quarter of all UK residents have experienced domestic abuse since the age of 16. The time when abuse starts in earnest is during pregnancy and the first 1,001 days of life. Some 30% of domestic abuse begins in pregnancy, rising to 40% in the first 1,001 days, precisely when infant brain development is the most sensitive to stress and trauma, but, terrifyingly, only 0.5% of maternity patients disclose abuse, so those numbers miss the majority of cases. Abuse during that period worsens maternal mental health, increases adverse birth outcomes and damages infants’ socio-emotional development. Those effects shift costs on to the NHS, social care, education and the justice system for years.
Relationships between parents and children can lead to stronger and more secure relationships and behaviour among those children as they grow up, but we know that currently only 55% of infants develop secure attachments, and that insecure attachment is a key driver of poor outcomes later in life. Research this month from the Centre for Mental Health and the Parent-Infant Foundation finds that expanding access to parent-infant relationship teams to support parents in the most deprived areas to bond with their babies could save the Government £1.2 billion annually.
The single most significant thing we could do in this Parliament to change all of this would be to introduce much better paternity leave—ideally at least six weeks at 90% of pay. Paternity leave in this country is truly embarrassing: two weeks is not enough. The UK’s offer of two weeks of unpaid statutory paternity leave is among the least generous in Europe, constraining fathers’ early involvement and entrenching relationship inequality. Modelling by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation found that six weeks at 90% of pay could deliver £2.68 billion to the wider economy, primarily through increased maternal employment and more equal sharing of care. Some 59% of people agreed that bad paternity leave made it difficult to share childcare responsibilities equally, not just in the short term, but in the long term, with patterns proving harder to shift.
Sarah Smith (Hyndburn) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. Women are 10% more likely to report that they do the majority of childcare. Some 66% of people surveyed want care to be more equal, and 74% of men want it to be more equal. Does my hon. Friend agree that we can only achieve that greater equality by addressing the fact that two weeks is not enough, and that patterns are laid in from day one that hold women, babies and men back from enjoying family life?
Maya Ellis
I completely agree with my hon. Friend; she is right that both men and women want this. Everyone in society is demanding this, and I really hope that the Government will listen and take action. An even more critical point is that it is not just men and women but children who will benefit from this. Ten to Men found that a loving paternal relationship was the single biggest factor in preventing a boy becoming a man who abuses his partner.
The macro win of all of this is higher labour supply and reduced gender gaps, the fiscal win is higher tax receipts and lower benefit dependency, and the household win is healthier relationships and more resilient income. Imagine the benefits if a dad or a partner could build a bond and confidence with their baby, so that understanding is deepened between parents, bonds are built to strengthen the determination to care for the baby, and a society is developed where protecting your family bubble becomes the pride point.
I will be frank: I truly hope that this Labour Government and the most progressive and gender-balanced Parliament ever will catch us up by committing to six weeks of protected paternity leave at 90% of pay, paid for by Government, and do it soon. If we do not take the single biggest step we can closer to equality, I do not know what we are here for.
The fact that radicalised me more than any other, and that tells me that we are still early on in the journey to equal and healthy relationships, is that before 1991 it was still legal to rape your wife. Anyone who got married before 1991 did so knowing that fact. We are only 35 years into a world that expects men and women to be equal in a marriage, and we are only beginning to work out what that means for us as a society.
One of the biggest hills we have to climb is helping men and boys find newly empowered roles in equal relationships, in the same way that women and girls have been doing. Many colleagues in this place are doing important work on building role models and positive education for boys, and the Government’s own violence against women and girls strategy includes teacher training to spot the early signs of misogyny in boys. I truly welcome the plans for improved relationships education in schools that the Government are introducing this year, particularly plans to start this earlier in primary schools and to focus on how to develop healthy relationships. None the less, we must remain alive to how early we subconsciously introduce power disparities.
As part of preparing for this debate, our friends at the Dad Shift challenged us to remember couples we admire for their equality, because role models are critical. The couple I admire most is Tom and Barbara Good from “The Good Life”. Amazingly, I only discovered the 1970s show recently and was slightly taken aback by how good they are to each other, in a way that makes me feel we have in some ways regressed from these days.
Natalie Fleet (Bolsover) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. A relationship that I admire for its equality is that of local constituents Mick and Jane Yates. They have been together for 16 years. To watch him go from being a councillor with many political demands, while his wife was not a councillor, to his wife not only becoming a councillor but leading Bolsover district council—a strong and inspiring leader whom he supports to thrive in her role—is just the best. Jane says they do not always agree on things, political or not, but does my hon. Friend agree that it is really important that, even when we disagree, we find ways in a healthy relationship to love and respect each other? That is what is at its core.
Maya Ellis
It is great to hear that Jane and Mick have such a positive relationship. One of the things that I really value is debate. The fact that in our new schools framework, we are introducing oracy—the ability to debate and discuss well—is really important. It has always been possible to have healthy relationships. We must create the right social and policy decisions to make them easier.
At this point, I want to give a quick shout-out to the incredible role models I see talking to women and men about building positive, healthy relationships—people like Neha Ruch, Libby Ward, Joeli Brearley, Ashley James, and so many others who are relentless in making sure we talk about what healthy relationships look like. I know there are similarly strong role models for men out there too, but we still have a long way to go.
Did you know, Ms Jardine, that there are only nine mentions of the term “mental load” in Hansard, yet as a mum on parenting Instagram I see it every other word? In my office we have four core aims, and one of them is to be useful, so I will end by leaving everyone with the most useful tool I have come across to tackle the mental load and promote equality in creating healthier relationships.
In Eve Rodsky’s book “Fair Play”, she says every task has three parts: conception, planning and action. To get something done, you first have to notice that it needs to be done. Then, you have to work out and plan how to do it. Then, you have to do it. It is great to see more couples starting to share actions around the home, but let us see more equal sharing of the noticing and planning too—and yes, that will probably involve realising how big the mental load actually is for some people.
Healthy relationships underpin healthy progress as a society, and whether we want to admit it or not, Government policy underpins healthy relationships. We are doing great things as a Government, with improved relationship education, a powerful VAWG strategy, more flexibility built into employment rights, a huge increase in best start family hubs investment and a strengthened court system, but we have to do more. Ninety per cent. of dads say they want to be more present in family life and have a more equal relationship, but our current paternity leave offer is one of the worst in the world. It blocks them right out of the gate. Stanford research published just this week found that couples who work one day a week from home would have around 0.5 more children on average, moving the current birth rate of 1.4 closer to the replacement rate, yet there are political voices saying that we should not work from home at all.
I hope we put healthy relationships more at the front and centre of all we do here. Our future depends on it. Again, I wish you a very happy Valentine’s day for Saturday, Ms Jardine.
Several hon. Members rose—
Order. I remind hon. Members that if they wish to speak, they should bob. Informally, speeches should be kept to around five minutes.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Ribble Valley (Maya Ellis) for securing such an important debate.
As someone who, before I was elected, worked in the sector, delivering programmes with and to young people, I understand how key this issue is. When we talk about healthy relationships, we are really talking about the kind of country we want to be. Long before a child sits an exam, applies for a job or decides who they want to spend the rest of their lives with, they are learning how to treat other people and how they expect to be treated themselves. Healthy relationships are therefore the foundation of confidence, safety, educational success and mental wellbeing. If we can get this right early on, we can prevent harm later; if we neglect it, we end up paying the price in poor outcomes and avoidable crises.
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Ribble Valley (Maya Ellis) for securing this excellent debate. One organisation that does really interesting work in this space—which, I am ashamed to say, I did not know much about until last year—is Soroptimist International, which has developed fantastic “Loves me, Loves me not” bookmarks that it takes into schools and colleges. The bookmarks detail the component parts of a healthy relationship, as well as how to detect whether or not someone is in one. Does my hon. Friend agree that more initiatives like that would take us in exactly the direction we need to go in?
Leigh Ingham
I agree with my hon. Friend. Soroptimist does incredible work in my constituency on supporting healthy relationships, as well as work to support women in prisons, which I have worked with it on, so I completely agree.
Schools in Stafford, Eccleshall and the villages are working really hard to get this right. I will speak to a couple of specific examples. At Tillington Manor primary school, healthy relationships are not an occasional lesson: they are woven through the culture of the school. Through a structured personal, social, health and economic education curriculum, children learn about friendship, family, communication, conflict resolution and how to recognise healthy and unhealthy behaviours.
The lessons are all age appropriate, and they build year on year. They are delivered through safe discussion, role play and reflection in a safe environment. But what really stands out to me is the whole-school approach. The school has dedicated spaces, such as the nook and the hive, where emotional support is provided for children and families, and the staff are trained in emotional literacy and wellbeing. As a result, the pupils are more confident in identifying healthy relationships and more likely to seek help from trusted adults. The school has found that, as a result of the programmes, repeated conflict has reduced over time. That is what prevention can look like in practice.
At secondary level, Sir Graham Balfour school teaches relationships and sex education from years 7 to 13 as a spiral curriculum. Students are learning about consent, safety, what healthy relationships look like and what toxic dynamics look like. The school also runs focused workshops on toxic relationships and masculinity for groups of pupils who might be struggling.
I am glad that my hon. Friend the Member for Ribble Valley mentioned the debate around boys and young men. The discussion often becomes incredibly polarised, but the reality is that many boys and young men are navigating a confusing online landscape where extreme and harmful messages about masculinity are only a click away—and then not even a click away, because algorithms amplify extremist content, and it gets worse and worse.
We need to create spaces where boys can talk honestly about respect, emotions and what it means to be a man, because we know that if we do not, someone else will fill the vacuum. Teaching children about healthy relationships is not about blaming boys; it is about equipping them and helping them to build the skills to form respectful partnerships, handle rejection and understand that strong men do not prey on the weakest in society. The healthy relationship that my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Natalie Fleet) spoke about was a wonderful example of that.
At the same time, we cannot ignore the pressures facing girls and young women. Schools in my constituency report increasing concerns about body image, self-esteem and unrealistic expectations, fuelled by social media. Girls are measuring themselves against edited, filtered versions of reality that are being presented as the norm on their phone screens.
When another school in my constituency strengthened its RSE curriculum, students began to come forward about inappropriate touching that had previously gone unreported. That was a significant step in creating the foundations of healthy relationships, and it makes it crystal clear why such lessons are so important.
Last week, I visited Burleyfields primary school, where four and five-year-olds told me how they keep their brains happy and healthy. They suggested—we all need to know this—baking, reading books, imaginative play and spending less time on our devices. Let us be honest: we could all do with a bit of that. Even at that age, the children knew what a healthy relationship and healthy activities could look like.
But schools cannot do it alone. Our Government have a real opportunity to build on the strong foundations that are already in place. Continued investment in high-quality PSHE and professional development will help to ensure consistency across the system, and strengthening early intervention mental health services would support children and families before things escalate.
I welcome the Government’s focus on attendance, behaviour and school improvement, which is helping to create conditions for healthier relationships in schools. With 140,000 fewer children persistently absent, and the new attendance and behaviour hubs spreading really good practice, we are seeing how structure and support can work effectively together.
In Stafford, our schools are already leading the way. They are demonstrating that when healthy relationships are embedded across the whole school, culture changes, behaviour improves and children feel safer. What steps is the Minister taking to advance the progress the Government have already made and build on the incredible work that is already being done in schools such as those in my constituency?
We all know that healthy relationships are not a luxury; they are a vital fabric underpinning our society. They define so many of the debates we have in this place, from academic attainment to mental health and public safety. If we want to create a generation that is resilient, respectful and ready to contribute, we must invest accordingly.
Freddie van Mierlo (Henley and Thame) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I thank the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Maya Ellis) for securing this debate. I know from the work we do together on the all-party parliamentary group on babies that she is a powerful advocate for babies in particular, and I am grateful for her input to the APPG for fatherhood, which I chair.
I want to use my time to zoom in on three issues that put stress and strain on relationships that are otherwise very healthy: parenthood, in particular the role of the father; caring for a child with SEND needs; and couples experiencing challenges with fertility.
First, on parenthood, there is no doubt that sleepless nights and the massive demand on time, energy and the emotional resilience that is required to raise a child leaves relationships on the back foot. All that is normal, of course, I am told, but the demands of modern life —the rising costs of living, the crippling costs of nursery and the need for couples to maintain two full-time jobs just to stay afloat—pile on the pressure and increase the scope for conflict. Couples can experience a loss of connection, becoming little more than roommates, and passing ships in the night.
One thing that would help is better parental leave and pay. The UK paternity offer is the lowest in Europe. Two weeks is not enough. The lack of leave paid at a liveable level leaves men and birthing partners less connected to their child and less able to make an equal contribution to parenting. That can drive resentment and disconnection in relationships, bake in traditional gender roles from the start, and leave children with lower-quality relationships with their fathers.
Research shows that fathers who take extended leave are more involved in their children’s lives long term, and that higher involvement improves cognitive and emotional outcomes for children. Higher paternal affection has been identified as the single biggest determinant from boyhood in preventing violence against women and girls. Paternity leave should increase to at least six weeks at 90% of earnings, and eligibility should be extended to self-employed parents.
I welcome the parental leave and pay review; however, I am concerned by the pace at which it is moving. Families have already struggled so long under the existing offer, and they do not have time to wait further for the Government’s extended deliberation. I have already pressed the Minister for Employment Rights, the hon. Member for Halifax (Kate Dearden), on the speed of the review, and will continue to do so.
On caring for a child with SEND needs, I am sure that other Members will be familiar with the SEND crisis in their constituencies. The Government are not providing upper-tier authorities with enough funding for SEND care. In Oxfordshire, there is a lack of specialist places in schools, and mainstream schools are struggling to cope. The funding attached to education, health and care plans does not cover the cost of SEND provision, including teaching support. Small schools in rural areas are least able to cover the cost from elsewhere in their budgets.
The whole system treats children as a burden to be managed and minimised. Parents must therefore fight with the system, often to tribunal, to get the support they need. Understandably, that places an immense burden on the parents’ relationship, which leads to higher rates of separation among parents with SEND children.
Finally, let me turn to the strain on relationships caused by fertility issues. Under the Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire and Berkshire West integrated care board, in vitro fertilisation treatment is restricted to women under 35, and only one cycle of treatment is provided. Guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommend that women under 40 should be offered at least three cycles. Given that the average age at which a woman will begin IVF is 35, the current offer in my area is unreflective of demographic and scientific evidence.
The ICB says that its decision is based on the unaffordability of providing IVF to patients over 35, but in what other area of health do we allow ICBs simply to ignore NICE guidelines because of affordability? The cost of going private places additional strain on relationships at a time when physical, mental and emotional burdens are high.
It is often cited that at least 50% of marriages end in divorce, but are we setting up couples to succeed when they start families? Starting a family and raising a child is not for everyone, but it is in everyone’s interest to support those who want to do so. We should not place all the burden on individual couples to maintain healthy relationships when so many structural barriers lie in their way.
Unhealthy relationships rarely exist in isolation. If we are serious about prevention, rather than simply picking up the pieces we must look honestly at the structural pressures and strains that families face, long before crisis ever surfaces. The relationships I really admire are those that endure through hardship by focusing on mutual support, empathy and understanding, but let us, in this place, give them a helping hand.
I have spoken about what can be done to help couples to stay together, but ending unhealthy relationships that have broken down is just as important. The state has a role here, too, where marriage, property and children are involved. I hope the Minister will consider improvements in the areas I have outlined.
It is always a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine.
I thank the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Maya Ellis) for setting the scene incredibly well and allowing us all to participate in this debate. As a husband, father and grandfather, the motion urged me to take a moment to think: what is a healthy relationship? I posed this question to myself before I came here, and I have been thinking about it in relation to how we might contribute to the debate. It is a question we should all ask ourselves, so I thank the hon. Lady for giving us pause today. If we are honest, we can all work on healthy relationships to make them that bit better and more successful. From partners to children, friends and colleagues, finding a healthier balance is something we all can and must do.
It is a pleasure to see the Minister in her place. I wish her well. We very much look forward to hearing her responses to our questions.
Many have referred to grandchildren, and my two grandchildren are staying with me at the minute. We live on a farm, and my son—along with his wife and the two children—is going to build a house on the farm. I always think about this when I come home after a hard week—and sometimes the weeks are incredibly difficult, with the pressures of life. Wee Freya is only five, and she always tells you that she loves you. Wee Ezra is only three, but he has that big smile. Both those things show just how important grandchildren are. These relationships are incredibly important for us all, and I so value the opportunity to have grandchildren who can lift you when you do not feel very much like being lifted. I know that the hon. Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) has her children, and they lift her, and others in this Chamber will know the importance of those things.
It is also clear that part of having healthy relationships is ensuring that our children and grandchildren understand what healthy is. To me, a healthy relationship is a respectful one, which I think is incredible. Am I perfect? I am far from perfect. I probably say things I should not say and do things I should not do—I regret it often—but I understand that respecting a loved one means watching our words and actions. If we respect them as we should, and as I do, we will be at pains to control our tempers or hurtful words.
I have three sons who are each married and have two children, and I know that my daughters-in-law and my sons are teaching their children that they are worth more than harsh words or actions, and that they are treasures worthy of a mutually respectful relationship. Where does that happen? It is done in the home, first of all, and we do it in our own lives, as we should, but it is also done in schools. Many schools in my area are always talking about how we build relationships. As a Christian, I should mention the importance of churches when it comes to a young man meeting a young woman, or vice versa. Churches give couples time to build their relationships and try to guide them in a way that they can understand and use in their lives. There is so much out there that we need to do.
We have incredible problems in Northern Ireland. There are probably problems across all of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but the message does not seem to have landed well in Northern Ireland. We have struggled with unhealthy relationships and, notably, both genders are the perpetrators. Domestic abuse remains a critical issue in Northern Ireland, according for nearly 20% of all recorded crime. I know the Minister does not have responsibility for Northern Ireland—it is a devolved matter—but it is worth giving the figures to add to the debate.
While reported incidents have overall shown a slight decline recently, certain categories such as sexual offences have seen an increase. Police recorded almost 30,000 domestic abuse incidents and almost 18,500 domestic abuse crimes in the 2024-25 financial year. Wow, that is incredible. That is scary. On average, the Police Service of Northern Ireland responds to domestic abuse incidents every 17 minutes. Females represent some 67% of victims, while males represent some 33%. That is the highest male proportion recorded to date. One in four women in Northern Ireland will experience domestic abuse in their lifetime.
There are a number of tragedies that must be recorded. There were eight domestic abuse motivated homicides recorded between 2024 and 2025, compared to six during the previous 12-month period. That is simply too many lives lost. That is too many children devastated, because there are those that are left behind, too. Sometimes we look at the person—the individual—but there are those that are left behind: the children, the mums and dads and all of the families who are mourning. It simply did not need to happen.
A further disturbing aspect of domestic abuse is the effect that it has on children. Over 23,000 referrals were made to support children affected by domestic abuse through school-based programmes in the past year in Northern Ireland. Boards of governors are now tabling Operation Encompass on each meeting agenda. Again, I underline the importance of schools to try and help in that area. That is a partnership between the PSNI and schools. If the police attend domestic incidents where a child is present, they notify the child’s school by the next morning so that immediate trauma-informed support can be provided. That wee child could be greatly disturbed by what they may have witnessed the night or day before. It is really important that these things are put in place.
My heart, and indeed, all our hearts ache for the children who are living with bad examples of healthy relationships. They may witness that every day. They have been conditioned to accept what is unacceptable. We all have a duty to ensure that schools have funding available to put on programmes and take time to provide a safe space and a listening ear. Again, that is not the Minister’s responsibility, but I am keen to hear what her thoughts are, because that is the only way that we can help to break the generational acceptance of the unacceptable. That is something that each of us in this Chamber, both individually and collectively as a House, strives for. It is something that I believe we can and will change. I have no doubt whatever that those who are present, and many who were not able to be, are committed to that change. I thank the hon. Member for Ribble Valley, who has done us all a massive favour by giving us the opportunity to come and make a contribution.
Before I move to the Front Benches, does anyone else wish to speak?
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. I think it is the first time I have spoken in a debate that you have chaired and it is wonderful to see you there.
I congratulate and thank the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Maya Ellis) for securing this important debate today. Before I get going, I just want to say what an honour it is to follow the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). We often joke in this place that he is at every debate, speaking on everything; today it is truly an honour to see the emotion and passion with which he spoke about being a grandfather. I sadly never got to know either of my grandfathers, and I would have been delighted to have had someone like the hon. Member for Strangford as my granddad. I thank him for that.
To be honest, when preparing for today, I thought, as the education team were asked to cover the debate, that we would largely be talking about relationships and sex education. I see that the Conservative Front Bench thought that too, and maybe even the Minister, so there we go.
I will go a little bit off script, because the hon. Member for Ribble Valley was much broader in her speech, talking about family policy and how we support and champion families. I am the education, children and family spokesperson for the Lib Dems. That is very deliberate, because as a party we believe that we should look at children and families much more holistically and not just through the prism of education. We are very keen on championing family policy, not just as a party but cross-party.
As several hon. Members have pointed out today, healthy relationships are difficult to build when we are living in such challenging times. There is a cost of living crisis; there are parents who are working full-time jobs and sometimes juggling two or three jobs, while trying to put food on the table and looking after children, and all the pressures that brings.
The hon. Member for Ribble Valley and my hon. Friend the Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) both talked about parental rights. I recognise the fiscal situation that this Government find themselves in, but we need to find the money to spend on parental rights and parental leave. All the evidence tells us that, in those early weeks and months after a baby is born, and in the early years, parental involvement at home can make a massive difference.
That is not making a judgment on those who want to go out to work—I say this as a working parent myself. I was very clear with my husband from the get-go—“I am not staying at home even part time, once I finish my maternity leave. I want to be back in the workplace.” He actually wanted to take the decision to go part time with our first child and was largely full time, apart from being a local councillor, with our son.
I will just get to the end of my point, and then am very happy to give way. The time at which my husband wanted to take more parental leave when our first child was born was towards the end of the coalition Government, before the new parental leave rights had come into place. He could not take any paid leave, although we were able to afford for him to do that. I will come on to what I think we should be doing on parental leave and paternity pay, but will give way first.
Sarah Smith
An important element that maybe has not come through so far in the debate is the class impact of the current policy situation. Currently, 90% of paternity leave claims are made by the top 50% of earners. It is very rare that low-income earners are able to even access the current system. Unfortunately, the challenge of the policies laid out under the coalition is that parental leave is only accessible to those who were better off to start with.
If we are going to get this right going forward, we have to design a policy framework and put forward legislation that puts those fathers and those families first. If we are not achieving parental leave for the families who are, if we are honest, those who are often dealing with the most complex situations, we are letting down the children that need us the most.
The hon. Lady makes a powerful point. I am not suggesting that the parental leave policy was perfect by any stretch of the imagination. If it was perfect, we would have far more fathers taking more parental leave, but typically it is mothers who take most parental leave. It is far from perfect, but the Government have an opportunity now, with their parental leave and pay review, to consider the situation holistically.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Henley and Thame has already set out, we as a party would like to see all parents being able to share parental leave. There would be six weeks of “use it or lose it” parental leave each, so that fathers, as much as mothers, have an entitlement of six weeks. However, the rest of the 46 weeks—taking us up to 52 weeks—would be for a mother and father to share as they wish.
Again, recognising that that is challenging fiscally at the moment, frankly we have an ambition to try and double the rates of statutory maternity pay, which is also parental pay. That probably relates to the point made by the hon. Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith), because at the moment the rates of statutory pay are, frankly, less than the minimum wage and lots of parents just cannot afford to take time off, and feel driven back into the workplace, often before they are ready to return to it. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the Leader of the Opposition, who at one point said that maternity pay was “excessive”. I think that it is far from “excessive”; indeed, it is far too low and we have a long way to go to improve it.
While we are discussing the parental leave and pay review, we should not forget about kinship families. Lots of families are not conventional families. Many children cannot grow up with their parents, but other family members look after them. Kinship carers step up overnight to look after children, frequently giving up jobs and careers, and incurring costs that they do not necessarily have a statutory right to receive any support for. Also, they are not allowed to take leave; often, they are excluded from adoption leave as well as from parental leave. When we are discussing family policy and building healthy relationships, that is a real gap in the system that needs to be fixed.
I will move on to what I was originally going to say today, which is about trying to build good relationships. We cannot take for granted that children growing up today will necessarily have access to the right sources of knowledge. The rise of technology and social media has put our children at increased risk of encountering extreme and harmful content that distorts their understanding of how they should interact with each other, what romantic relationships look like, and—frankly—what sex looks like.
We know that women are 27 times more likely than men to be harassed online, and that a third of young women between the ages of 17 and 21 have received unwanted sexual images online. We know that the online world needs to be reined in, with tech companies and influencers alike profiteering by exploiting the insecurities that men and boys often have, through the use of addictive algorithms that often promote radicalising content and monetise misogynistic content.
It might have been the hon. Member for Ribble Valley who said that we should not stereotype our image of what men and boys are like at the moment. However, I think it is true that many men and boys feel increasingly lonely and isolated, and struggle with all sorts of issues, whether the cost of living or a lack of access to other positive activities. So, we need to look at men and boys as well as at women and girls, and to consider the different needs of each.
I said in a debate on relationship education last year that we need a culture change in all aspects of society. We must encourage the men in our lives—our brothers, fathers, friends, boyfriends, husbands and sons—to stand up against the toxic masculinity that we have seen, and to demonstrate to other men in their lives, particularly young men, what it means to be compassionate and kind in all relationships, and to realise that compassion is a strength and not a weakness.
Given the significant amount of online content that promotes violence against women and girls, which is particularly targeted at men and boys, we need to ensure that we protect our children and young people, not only because of the risk of harm to their mental and physical wellbeing but because of the impact on their social development and how they build relationships.
That is why we, as a party, have called very strongly for a ban on harmful social media for under-16s. Different political parties have different proposals on how such a ban could be implemented, but I think it needs to go hand in hand with getting people off their devices and into other activities, as the hon. Member for Stafford (Leigh Ingham) mentioned. We cannot start restricting things for children and young people if we do not give them alternatives. I have seen that at youth facilities that are easy and cheap, or free, to access. When the young people at those facilities were asked, “What did you do before you came here?”, they said, “We would be on our screens, in our bedroom, on our phones.” We have to provide those third spaces for young people.
Leigh Ingham
During the years in which Staffordshire had a Conservative-led county council, which coincided with the Conservative Government, we suffered the third-worst youth service cuts in the country. One of the things most regularly brought up with me when I meet constituents is how few activities there are for young people.
Indeed, I spoke to the vicar of a church in Eccleshall who told me that he had made a map of the activities in Eccleshall for older people and those for younger people. He came up with 112 things for older people to do in that part of my constituency, but none for younger people. Does the hon. Member agree that, while we are considering healthy relationships—and youth workers are key to modelling this behaviour, because they give a safe space to talk—we must focus on equipping our local authorities, in my case a Reform-led local authority, to prioritise the needs of young people?
I could not agree more. Youth services are critical and youth workers are amazing, whether they are employed by local authorities, our churches or voluntary groups up and down the country. I am the parent of an 11-year-old who is at the age where, in the holidays, she absolutely does not want to go to holiday clubs. I am trying to persuade her to go to some of the youth venues in the area. We are lucky that we still have two or three of those facilities, but I recognise that in some areas of the country there is not very much. I welcome that the Government have made announcements in this area—the Culture Secretary has made some very positive announcements on this issue. I would like to see a longer-term strategy to support those announcements, particularly in relation to the workforce.
In the classroom, relationships and sex education is so important for tackling and preventing violence against women and girls. I see amazing examples in my constituency, where schools are working hard on this issue. I am proud that our local authority, Richmond council, is White Ribbon-accredited and does lots of work with schools and lots of awareness-raising work in the area.
However, age-appropriate relationships and sex education at school has a crucial role to play, alongside the role of parents and carers, in giving children the knowledge and information they need to keep them safe by teaching them about consent, healthy relationships and online risks such as pornography and sexting. That is essential for safeguarding. Yet, according to a report by Internet Matters, many children say that they have
“received no specific education in relation to sexual image sharing or only very superficial coverage”
in relationships and sex education lessons, and that they do not feel able to get the information they want in whole-class groups. Many children felt that they were not offered enough information when the issue was discussed and that, when information was delivered by teachers who were not subject specialists, those teachers
“often sped through the topic because they found it ‘awkward’”.
[Interruption.] Was that a cough to say that I need to wind up, Ms Jardine?
Okay. I was not sure whether you were struggling. I will bring my remarks to a close.
The Liberal Democrats believe that an age-appropriate RSE curriculum should be led by a qualified teacher, be delivered in a safe, non-judgmental setting, and include teaching about sexual consent, LGBT+ relationships and issues surrounding explicit images. All young people deserve access to high-quality education that empowers them to make safe and informed choices. That obviously also means proper funding, training and resources to deliver high-quality RSE. I have already set out some of the family policies we would like to see. If we want to achieve a society in which all can flourish and have happy, healthy relationships, we need to invest in our families and in our education system.
Rebecca Paul (Reigate) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. I congratulate the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Maya Ellis) on a refreshing, measured, fantastic speech. Like the hon. Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson), I expected a slightly different topic, but it was pleasing to hear so much about the importance of strong families. Maybe we can do this debate again and I will write a slightly different speech. Between us all, we will cover various aspects that are relevant and important. I would also like hon. Members to know that I, too, am watching season 4 of “Bridgerton”—a classic Cinderella tale—which is very enjoyable.
Healthy relationships are underpinned by respect. In most cases, the way we would wish to be treated ourselves is probably a good place to start our relationships with others, but we continue to see high levels of violence against women and girls, as well as other kinds of abuse such as coercive control, with no real signs of reduction. That suggests something is going badly wrong, and the Government have rightly set challenging ambitions to address this huge societal problem.
We very much welcome the Government’s recently published VAWG strategy and their ambition to halve such violence, and we hope it will build on the work undertaken by the previous Government. The Conservatives elevated violence against women and girls to a crime type that policing leaders must treat as a national threat, and we committed over £230 million to the tackling domestic abuse plan from 2022 to 2025. That included quadrupling the funding for victim and witness support services by 2024-25, and it complemented the £300 million investment in the 2021 tackling VAWG strategy as part of the goal to drive down the prevalence of domestic abuse.
The previous Government also created two new offences: stalking and stalking involving fear of violence, serious alarm or distress. That made it easier for victims to hold stalkers to account. On top of that, we also outlawed upskirting to further protect women and girls, criminalised revenge porn and deepfakes, and introduced the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 and, accordingly, domestic abuse protection notices and orders. We are clear that robust action against offenders is vital in the fight against VAWG.
Although relationship education in schools can go only so far in addressing male violence against women and girls, it nevertheless plays an important role in educating young people on what positive and healthy relationships looks like, and the importance of putting in place clear boundaries. Those skills are vital in navigating relationships, recognising potential abuse, including coercive control, and knowing how and when to seek help when needed.
Relationship education was made compulsory in all primary and secondary schools in 2020. It has several core objectives: to foster pupil wellbeing, to develop resilience and character, and to ensure that pupils are happy, successful and productive members of society. In spite of that, shockingly, nearly three women every single week are killed by men, and many, many more are raped and abused.
The risks and harms arising from the online world are feeding this problem. Pornography is available online at the touch of a button on smartphones. Let me be clear: this is harmful stuff that depicts strangulation, rape, violence and degrading acts such as spitting on young women. Any young man seeing such misogynistic content day in, day out will inevitably view women and girls differently. They will be more likely to see them as an object to use and degrade. By comparison, the relatively trivial amount of time spent learning the opposite in a classroom cannot hope to offset that. The single best thing we can do to stem the tide is to introduce a ban on smartphones in schools for under-16s and increase the age limit for social media to 16. That will not address the whole issue, of course, but it will massively help. The Conservatives have backed it all the way, and I ask the Minister to do so too. The Government’s proposal to ban strangulation content is welcome and a positive step forward.
I am concerned that our strong desire to eradicate VAWG has led to boys and men being unnecessarily demonised. There is a difference between calling out abusive behaviour and labelling a whole set of masculine attributes as toxic. Masculinity is a wonderful thing—the yang to femininity’s yin—and it is certainly not toxic in the great majority of cases, particularly when it is not fuelled by online porn.
Our answer to a genuine question about the abuse of girls has been to tell a generation of boys, “You are the problem,” and then we are surprised when that approach, instead of nurturing healthy relationships, creates resentment and pushes more young men towards the very online subcultures that feed off grievance and rejection. Instead, we need to positively embrace what being a good man, a good partner and a good father look like. Fundamentally, boys need positive role models from which to learn and model their own relationships. That is why fathers and other male role models are so important. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s thoughts on that.
When it comes to education on healthy relationships, we have seen an ever-growing load of subject matter covering issues from relationships to mental health. Good RSHE can be a protective factor when it is age-appropriate, factual and taught impartially, but it is also important to recognise that schools should not try to replace the education that should be the family’s role. There is a careful balance to be struck.
As well as confident, self-assured boys, we need confident, self-assured girls who are clear about their boundaries and what behaviours they are willing to accept and not accept. That means not telling them that selling their bodies is empowering, not expecting them always to be kind, and not telling them that the feelings of men are more important than their safety. On that point, I hope we might hear something today about the Government’s unresolved approach to gender-questioning guidance for schools and the release of the long-awaited code of practice on single-sex spaces following the recent Supreme Court ruling.
The Government cannot claim to support healthy relationships so long as they leave schools to navigate the issue without proper guidance. It is incumbent on this Government to reinforce rules that entitle our girls and women to privacy from males when they are getting changed—that is basic safeguarding.
We received the draft non-statutory guidance on gender-questioning children back in December 2023, but two years later, schools and parents are still waiting for it to be published. Will the Minister confirm when we can expect to see both the gender-questioning guidance and the revised code of practice from the Equality and Human Rights Commission?
My final point is on the need to be honest about where the deeper formation of relationships happens. Schools matter and good teachers can be life-changing, but let us not lose sight of the fact that children spend most of their time outside the classroom. The attitudes that shape relationships are forged primarily at home, as well as online and in peer groups. If we want healthy relationships, we cannot pretend that a curriculum document can substitute for a loving and nurturing family structure. Families can come in all different shapes and sizes, but the important thing is that they are loving, nurturing and respectful. Children learn how to interact with others from their main caregivers. What are the Minister’s plans to support strong families, given that it is likely to be the most impactful way a Government can ensure healthier relationships?
Jade Botterill (Ossett and Denby Dale) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Ribble Valley (Maya Ellis) for opening this debate on the Government’s support for healthy relationships. It was great to hear hon. Members talking about what healthy relationships mean to them, and it is wonderful to see both Movember and Dad Shift in the Gallery today.
This debate could not come at a more welcome time. We have recently published our groundbreaking strategy for halving violence against women and girls in the next 10 years, backed by at least £1 billion of Government funding. We published updated relationships, sex and health education guidance last summer, which will be implemented in all schools from September, and we have committed £8 million to support schools to maximise the impact of curriculum changes. The importance of healthy relationships was written in our manifesto, and we are proud of the action this Labour Government are taking in this area.
The new curriculum reflects the importance of supporting young children to build the skills for healthy relationships from the start of primary. We should not pretend that relationships are easy, and the reason we are having this conversation is because we know they are not. We will support children to learn the difficult skills of setting and recognising healthy boundaries, balancing different people’s needs and preferences, managing conflict and communicating with kindness and respect.
In secondary school, we will move away from an exclusive focus on consent, which has led to a culture of “anything goes, so long as I’ve got a yes.” Young people must understand the importance of consent, but they must also understand that consent alone is not enough. We want to raise a generation of young people who value kindness, who pay attention, who notice power imbalances and who look out for vulnerability. This is fundamentally about how we approach our relationships. Are we out there trying to get what we want from other people, or are we here to be kind and take care of each other?
We will teach young people how to turn a critical lens on content that encourages harmful attitudes or prejudice in any form of media. In the online world of Andrew Tate’s AI deepfakes and hatred presented as brotherly advice, we will ensure that young people can identify misogyny and recognise how social media influencers capitalise on it to the detriment of men and women and boys and girls. We have to be absolutely clear that this does not mean stigmatising boys, or making boys feel that they are the enemy. Where society polarises, the job of schools is to help young people find their common ground. Where boys and young men feel lost or isolated, the job of schools is to ensure they have a safe space where they feel they belong. None of that is easy and we are not saying teachers hold all the answers, but they clearly need support. That is why we are investing £11 million in support for schools; £8 million to support the RSE curriculum and £3 million to provide targeted support for children who are displaying harmful behaviours. We believe that every child deserves the support needed to develop healthy relationships.
Hon. Members have rightly drawn attention to the importance of strong, loving families, and many have discussed the need for stronger paternity leave. The Government have launched a full review of the parental leave system. It is a chance to look at how the whole framework can better support working families and reflect the realities of modern work and childcare. Equitable childcare arrangements not only promote family stability, but help address the gender pay gap.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Ribble Valley rightly raised, what it means to grow up in a typical family has fundamentally changed; divorce rates have grown, more women are in the workforce, and households are much more likely to have two earners. Government policy must reflect and support families as they exist in modern working Britain. That is why, through our strategy for giving every child the best start in life, we have set out our first steps to expand and strengthen family services. It will make early education and childcare more accessible and affordable, and improve the quality of early education and childcare to make real change happen for families and children across the country.
We are already delivering support to working families. Eligible working parents of children aged nine months and older are now benefitting from 30 hours of funded childcare per week, which can save families up to £7,000 per eligible child every year. We are improving access by creating tens of thousands of places in new and expanded school-based nurseries. Schools have already reported that more than 5,000 places have been made available through the first phase of that programme. Backed by £45 million of funding, phase 2 will deliver at least 300 new or expanded school-based nurseries that will be ready to offer new childcare places in the 2026-27 academic year. There will be an increased focus on supporting families from disadvantaged areas to access early years provision.
Phase 3 will be led by local authorities, who have been invited to develop multi-year funding proposals. The Government continue to prioritise and protect investment in the early years. That is why we are investing more than £1 billion more in the early years entitlements year on year, and we will continue to go further. From next year, we will give additional funding to extend the early years pupil premium in the areas most in need, testing new approaches to maximise its impact and ensuring that children most at risk of falling behind receive high-quality, evidence-informed support. To make sure that the early years funding system is hardwired to benefit those children in parts of the country that have higher levels of additional need, we will review early years funding, including national funding formulas, and consult the sector on the changes by this summer.
As part of the child poverty strategy, we will work with the Department for Work and Pensions to make it easier for parents to use universal credit childcare and the funded hours together, helping them to access work. Those changes are made with modern families in mind. The 30 hours of childcare entitlement is designed to help families get on, not just get by. It is assessed on a per-person basis to ensure there is no incentive for the lower earner in the household to reduce their income to be eligible.
Not every child gets the chance to be born in a safe and stable family. Domestic violence can sometimes begin during pregnancy. Refuge has reported that
“1 in 3 pregnant women experience domestic abuse”
and between April 2024 and March 2025,
“14% of Refuge’s service users reported being pregnant.”
That is why NICE guidelines are clear that all women accessing maternity services should routinely be asked about domestic abuse, typically at their first antenatal booking appointment, so they can be referred to specialist services. As our strategy for halving violence against women and girls makes clear, tackling domestic abuse is a whole-society effort. When proximity to such violence begins in childhood, my hon. Friend the Member for Ribble Valley is correct that Best Start family hubs can be vital for identifying and tackling it. When parents are struggling to support their children, family hubs can give them new skills to help their children’s social, cognitive and emotional development. That is why we are building on this year’s £126 million funding boost for family hubs and the Start for Life programme. We will be rolling out our Best Start family hubs to every local authority from April.
Children also learn from their peers, and that is why we are actively considering the evidence on peer-to-peer and trusted adult relationships as we develop our pupil engagement framework. That framework will help all schools measure and improve the key factors that determine pupils’ engagement in education. That includes a sense of belonging, safety and inclusion, and relationships with teachers and fellow pupils.
Rich, healthy relationships thrive in a context of shared purpose and understanding. We all know that from our experiences of taking part in sport, putting on plays or even confronting and understanding differing points of view. That is why we are supporting schools and colleges to develop strong and strategic enrichment offers through our upcoming enrichment framework, which will encourage a sense of belonging and enable children and young people to form communities, explore their interests and develop their skills.
I was really touched to hear of the couples admired by Members across the House. Their contributions reminded me of my own parents, who worked so hard to raise me and my two siblings. They both worked long shifts, put food on the table and, around that table, made decisions together. They taught me the values I carry with me today. I grew up with the benefit of healthy relationships at home, at school and in my community. Every child deserves that chance, and has such capacity to enjoy positive, healthy relationships when given the opportunity. Through our childcare expansion, our strategy to tackle violence against women and girls, our work in schools, our review of parental leave and our plans to support and nurture boys, this Government are committed to helping everyone benefit.
Maya Ellis
It has been a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. This has been an important opportunity for us to reflect on what healthy, equal relationships look like in Britain today, the pressures that couples face and how policy can better support them. I am grateful to all hon. Members who contributed, and I pay special tribute to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for his beautiful tribute to his grandchildren. Children learn from what they see, and his grandchildren are clearly growing up in a loving family to reflect such love to him. I also acknowledge the spokespeople in the Chamber, the hon. Members for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) and for Reigate (Rebecca Paul). The topic of healthy relationships spans multiple Departments, and part of the challenge is ensuring that it does not fall between the gaps, for that reason.
Some days we carry the load, and some days we are carried. I am grateful for all the relationships in the Chamber, and all those at home, that carry me on a regular basis. On that note, I give final thanks to my husband, who I called just before the debate to tell him that the holiday I thought I had booked for Saturday in fact starts tomorrow, to which he just laughed and said, “I’ll start packing.” That is sharing the load, and that is what we all deserve.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered Government support for healthy relationships.