Commons Chamber

Tuesday 18th March 2025

(began 1 day, 7 hours ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
11:34
11:35
11:35
11:36
11:36
11:37
11:37
11:38
11:38
11:38
11:39
11:40
11:40
11:41
11:42
11:43
11:43
11:44
11:45
11:45
11:46
11:46
11:47
11:47
11:48
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:51
11:51
11:52
11:53
None Portrait Q4. What progress he has made on achieving clean power by 2030. (903232)
-

Question number four Mr Speaker.
11:53
11:53
11:54
11:54
11:55
11:55
11:56
11:57
11:57
11:57
None Portrait Q6. What discussions he has had with energy suppliers on support for consumers. (903234)
-

Question number six Mr Speaker.
11:57
11:58
11:58
11:59
12:00
12:01
12:01
12:02
12:02
12:03
12:03
12:04
12:04
12:05
12:05
12:06
12:06
12:06
12:07
12:08
12:08
12:09
12:09
12:10
12:10
12:11
12:12
None Portrait Q10. Whether he is taking steps to maintain the role of nuclear energy within his energy security strategy. (903238)
-

Question Number 10, please.
12:12
12:12
12:13
12:14
12:14
12:15
12:16
12:16
12:16
12:17
12:17
12:18
12:18
12:19
12:19
None Portrait Q14. What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the development of large-scale solar farms. (903242)
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

care about where things are made, and we will make those good manufacturing jobs happen. Father of the House.
12:19
12:20
12:20
12:21
12:21
12:22
12:22
12:22
12:23
12:23
12:23
12:24
12:24
12:25
12:25
12:25
12:26
12:26
12:26
12:27
12:27
12:28
12:28
12:28
12:29
12:29
12:29
12:30
12:30
12:30
12:30
12:31
12:31
12:32
12:32
12:32
12:33
12:33
12:33
12:34
12:34
12:34
12:34
12:35
12:35
12:35
12:36
12:37
12:37
12:37
Liz Kendall Portrait Rt Hon Liz Kendall MP, The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Leicester West, Labour)
-
-
Mr Speaker, this government is ambitious for our people and our country. We believe that unleashing the talents of the British people is the key to our future success. But the social security system that we inherited from the Conservatives is failing the very people it is supposed to help and holding our country back. The facts speak for themselves. 10% of people of working age are now claiming a sickness or disability benefit. Almost one million young people are not in education, employment or training.

12.5% of all our young people. 2.28 million out of work due to long-term sickness and the number of people claiming Personal Independence Payments is set to double in this decade up to 4.3 million, with a growth in claims rising faster among young people and mental health young people and mental health conditions, and with claims up to four times higher in parts of the Midlands, Wales and the north, where economic demand is weakest places that were decimated in the 1980s and 1990s, written off for years by successive Tory governments, and never given the chances they deserve.

The consequences of this failure are there for all to see. Millions of people who could work trapped on benefits, denied the trapped on benefits, denied the We know that good work brings. Taxpayers paying millions more on the cost of failure. With spending on working age sickness and disability benefit up by 20 billion since the pandemic. Set to rise by a further 18 billion by the end of this Parliament up to £70 billion per year. It is not like this in most other comparable countries.

Where spending on these benefits since the pandemic is either stable or falling. While ours continues to inexorably rise. This is the legacy of 14 years of Tory failure. And today we say no more. Since we were elected, we have hit the ground running to get more people into good work through our plans for change. We are investing an extra £26 billion into the NHS to drive down waiting lists and get people back to health and back to work.

We are improving the quality of work and making work pay with our landmark employment rights legislation and increases in the National Living Wage. We are creating more good jobs in every part of the country. In clean energy and through the modern industrial strategy. We are introducing the biggest reforms to employment support in a generation. With our £240 million get Britain working plan. Today our pathway to work Green Paper sets out decisive action to fix the broken benefits system.

Creating a more proactive, pro-work system for those who can work, so we protect it for those who cannot work, now and for the long term. Mr Speaker, I know as a constituency MP of 14 years that there will always be people who can never work because of the severity of their disability or illness. Under this government, the social security system will always be there for people in genuine need. That is a principle we will never compromise on. But disabled people and people with health conditions who can work should have the same rights, choices and chances to work as everybody else.

That principle of equality is vital as well. Because far from what members opposite would have you believe, many sick and disabled people want to work with the right help and support. Unlike the Conservatives, that is what we will deliver. Our first aim is to secure a decisive shift towards prevention and early intervention. Almost 4 million people are in work with a work limiting health condition. And around 300,000 drop out of work every year. We have got to do much more to help people stay in work and get back to work quickly.

Because your chances of returning are five times higher in the first year. Our plan is to give Statutory Sick Pay for one million of the lowest paid workers and more right to flexible working to help keep more people in Work well 'Africa Briefing' is trialling new approaches like GPs referring people to employment advisers, instead of signing them off sick. The keep Britain working review, led by the former John Lewis boss, will help set out what government and employers can do together to create a healthier, more inclusive workplaces.

-- The work well programme. We will create more opportunities for people including measures like reasonable adjustments, alongside the Green Paper consultation on reforming access to work so that it is fit for the future. Today I can announce another step. Our Green Paper will consult on a major reform of contributory benefits. Merging contributions based Jobseeker's Allowance and Employment & Support Allowance into a new, time-limited unemployment insurance, paid at a higher rate, without having to prove you cannot work in order to get it.

If you have paid into the system, you will get stronger income protection while we help you get back on track. Our second objective is to restore trust and fairness in the benefits system. By fixing the broken assessment process and tackling the perverse incentives that drive people into welfare dependency. Members on this side of the House have long argued that the Work Capability Assessment is not fit for purpose. Going through the WCA is complex, time-consuming and often stressful for claimants.

Especially if they also have to go through the PIP assessment. Fundamentally it is based upon a binary can and cannot work divide when we know that in truth many people 's physical and mental health conditions can fluctuate. The consultation on the discredited WCA proposals of the Conservatives was ruled unlawful by the courts. Today I can announce that we will not go ahead with their proposals. Instead, we will scrap the WCA in 2028. In future, extra financial support for health conditions in Universal Credit will be available only through the PIP assessment.

So extra income will be based on the impact of a health condition or disability, and not on capacity to work. Reducing the number of assessments people have to go through and a vital step towards de-risking work. And we will do more. By legislating for a right to try. Guaranteeing that work in and of itself will never lead to a benefit reassessment. Giving people the confidence to take the plunge and try work without the fear that it will put their benefits at risk.

We will also tackle the perverse financial incentives that the party opposite created. Which actively encouraged people into welfare dependency. The Tories ran down the value of the Universal Credit standard allowance. As a result the health topic is now worth double the standard allowance at more than £400 per month. In 2017, they took away extra financial help for the group of people that could prepare for work. So we are left with a binary assessment of can or cannot work. And a clear financial incentive to define yourself as incapable of work.

Something the OBR, IFS and others say is a likely factor driving people onto incapacity benefits. Today we tackle this head on. We will rebalance the payment in Universal Credit from April next year. Holding the value of the health top up, fixed in cash terms for existing claimants and reducing it for new claimants. With an additional premium for people with severe life long conditions that means they will never work to give them the financial security they them the financial security they We will bring in a permanent rise to Universal Credit for the first time ever.

A £775 annual increase in cash terms by 2029/30. In a decisive step to tackle the perverse incentives in the system. We will also fix the failing system of reassessments. The Conservatives failed to switch me assessment back on after the pandemic. They are down by more than two thirds with face-to-face assessment going from seven in 10 to only one in 10. We will turn these reassessments back on at scale. And shift the focus back to doing more face-to-face. And we will ensure they are recorded as standard.

To give confidence to claimants and taxpayers that they are being done properly. I can also announce for people on Universal Credit with the most severe disabilities and health conditions that will never improve, we want to ensure that they are never reassessed, to give them the confidence and dignity they deserve. And we will fundamentally overhaul the DWP's safeguarding approach. To make sure all our processes of training are of the highest quality, so we protect and support the most vulnerable people.

Alongside these changes, we will reform disability benefits, they focus on those in greatest need, and to ensure the social security system lasts for the long-term into the future. Social and demographic change means more people are now living with a disability. The increase in disability benefits is double the rate of increasing prevalence of working age disability the country. With claims amongst young people up 150%. For mental health conditions at 190%, and claims for learning difficulties up over 400%, according to the IFS.

Every day, there are more than 1000 new PIP awards. That is the equivalent of adding a population the size of Leicester everything all year. That is not sustainable long-term. Above all, for the people who depend on this support. But the Tories had no proper plan to deal with this, just yet more ill thought through consultations. Today I can announce this government will not bring in the Tory proposals for vouchers because disabled people should have choice and control over their lives.

We will not means test PIP because disabled people deserve extra support whatever their incomes. And Mr Speaker I can confirm we will not freeze PIP either. Instead our reforms will focus support on those with the greatest needs. We will legislate for a change in PIP so people will need to score a minimum of four point in at least one activity to qualify for the daily living element of PIP from November 2026. This will not affect the mobility component of PIP, and only relates to that daily living element.

Alongside this, we will launch a review of the PIP assessment. Led by my right honourable friend the Minister for Social Security and disability, in close consultation with disabled people, the organisations that represent them, and other experts. So we make sure PIP and the assessment process is fit for purpose now and into the future. This is a significant reform package that is expected to save over £5 billion in 2029/30. The OBR will set up their final assessment of the costings next week.

Our third and final objective is to deliver personalised support to sick and disabled people who can work, to get the jobs they need and deserve. We know from the last Labour government and our new deals for disabled people, young people and the long- term unemployed, the difference that proper employment supports can make. More recent evidence from the work choice program and additional work coach time show support can make a significant difference in the number of people getting work, keeping work, and improving their mental health and well-being too.

This Labour government believes that an active state can transform people's lives. We know this because we have done it before. So today I announced we will invest an additional £1 billion a year for employment support with the aim of guaranteeing high quality tailored and personalised support to help people on a pathway to work. The largest ever investment in opportunities to work for sick and disabled people. Alongside this, for those on the UC health copout we were bringing an expectation to engage, and a new support conversation to talk about people's goals and aspirations, combined with an offer of personalised health skills and employment support.

Because being out of work and training when you are young is so damaging to your future prospects, we will go further. In addition to funding our youth guarantee, to the £240 million get Britain working plan, we will consult on delaying access to the health top up in Universal Credit until someone is aged 22. With the savings reinvested into work support and training opportunities, so every young person is earning or learning and on a pathway to success. Mr Speaker, the Conservatives left a broken benefits system.

It is failing the people who depend on it and our country as a whole. The status quo is unacceptable. But it is not inevitable. We were elected on a mandate for change. To end the sticking plaster approach and tackle the root causes of problems in this country have been ignored for too long. Because we believe in the value and potential of every single person, that we all have something positive to contribute and can make a difference. Whether it is in paid work, in our families or communities, alongside our neighbours and friends.

We will unleash this potential in every corner of the land because we are as ambitious for the British people as they are for themselves. Today we take decisive action, and I commend this statement to the house.
12:54
Helen Whately Portrait Helen Whately MP (Faversham and Mid Kent, Conservative)
-
-
Shadow Secretary of State.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Mr Speaker. I thank the right honourable lady for advanced right honourable lady for advanced sight of her statement. She and I agree on one thing, the welfare bill is too high. Left unchecked it will is too high. Left unchecked it will rise to £100 million by the end of the decade. Spending more on sickness benefits we do on defence sickness benefits we do on defence is not the sign of a strong country. This isn't just a question of money.

We have 3 million working age people We have 3 million working age people not working due to ill health. Not filling the roles businesses need, not contributing to our economy, not fulfilling their own potential. The best way to get the welfare bill down to get people off benefits and into work. That is what we did year after year, after taking office in 2010. Despite the once in a century pandemic, there were 4 million more people in employment when we left office than the mess we inherited from Labour.

Before the pandemic, economic inactivity was that a historic low. But it is true that then we started to see a new phenomenon. Growing numbers of people claiming sickness benefits and particularly worryingly, young people. A system set up with good intentions to protect the most vulnerable in society had, over time, morphed into something broader. Driven in part by a well- intentioned but not always helpful medicalisation of life ups and downs. In government, identified this problem. We worked out plans to tackle it but, at every point, Labour opposed them.

In fact, the Chancellor said that not one single penny could be saved from benefits. So when they came into office, not only did they cancel or delay pretty much everything we handed over, they had no plans of their own. They walked into the Department with empty notebooks. All they have done in opposition is opposed. Instead of the hard work of coming up with their own answers. That is why the country has had to wait another eight months for this announcement. In that time taxpayers have shelled out £7 billion in extra sickness benefits.

Nearly half a million people have been signed off sick. In fact the people were signed onto sickness benefits by the right honourable lady was talking. Nonetheless I have been looking forward to hearing what she would announce today. In which of the many things brief that the media would eventually land on. Governing is hard. We know that. The last few weeks, they have made it look really hard. But nothing compared to how hard life can be for a severely disabled person.

Somebody for whom getting up, getting dressed, getting breakfast, things most of us here felt easy to do this morning, they find hard if not impossible. For some people the last few weeks has been deeply frightening. They will be glad for the uncertainty to finally be at an end. Mr Speaker, I can genuinely say that I want the right honourable lady to succeed. I welcome the commitment today to increase the number of reassessment, and that more of these will be taking place face-to-face and recorded.

I welcome the investment in employment support for disabled people. And of course I welcome her re-announcing a host of things we were doing in government. Scrapping the Work Capability Assessment and creating a single assessment, that is already government policy. Due to coming in 2026/27. Her big idea seems to be to delay this until 2028. Emerging new start JSA and another benefit into a new higher rate, tidying up eligibility for PIP, consultation we launched would have gone further on. Anything assessment of people whose conditions won't improve we consulted.

Their rights to try guarantee sounds be similar to our chance to work guarantee. And of course the continued support for "Work well", a program I launched with the now shadow Chancellor. In fact the only original idea I see their entire announcement is increasing the rate of unemployment benefits. A Labour policy if ever I heard one. This is a now or never chance to seize the moment. A now or never for millions of people who will otherwise be signed off from what could end up being a lifetime on benefits.

But this announcement today leaves me with more questions than answers. How many people will this help back into work? By when? Surely we have not been waiting eight months for another Green Paper? A fit note reform crucial to stem the flow of people onto benefits. Where is the action of people being signed off sick for the general ups and downs of life? Why is she only came to save £5 billion when the bill is forecast to rise to over £100 million? Do the savings she is announcing today include the 5 billion Do the savings she is announcing today include the £5 billion savings we already announced with the OBR? If so she has made virtually no savings of her own.

What is the saving net the additional expenditure planned? Fundamentally, this is too little too late. The fact is, £5 billion does not cut it with a bill so big going up so far. She needed to be tougher. She should be saying no more hard-working taxpayers funding the family next door not to work. No more free top of the range cars to people who don't need them. No more benefits claiming people to take money they don't need.

But before she puts on her angry voice to shout me about 14 years and I gently say to her that everyone in this chamber and in the country knows that we lost and they won, and now her job is to govern. And it is my job to hold her to account. Our country needs everyone who can work to work. This principle should be at the heart of our welfare system. It is good for the taxpayer, good for the economy, good for the individual and family who benefit from the security and purpose that work brings.

And it means that those who genuinely cannot work get the support they deserve. But the fact is fewer people work under Labour. It has happened every time they have been in office and it is already happening now. They should have taken their time in opposition to come up with some meaningful reforms. They didn't. The countries reforms. They didn't. The countries
13:01
Liz Kendall Portrait Rt Hon Liz Kendall MP, The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Leicester West, Labour)
-
-
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I personally like the honourable lady a great deal. But her entire response seems to be railing against the failings of her own party. Lamenting action that her party failed to take. Too little, too late indeed will be the epitaph of the Conservative party. One thing I do agree with is that this is a now or never a moment. This government is taking decisive action. Ducking the challenges that have been ignored for too long.

I say Mr Speaker that I'm not interested in a tough, this is about real people with real lives and we have to be careful how we talk about this. I am interested in taking the right steps to change the system, transform lives and crucially make sure we have a social security system that lasts in future. 33% of us will have a health condition in our lifetimes. 25% of us are disabled. Unless we wake up to that fact, that welfare state that the Labour Party created will not be there for future generations and that is what we are determined to secure.

This is a substantial package of measures. It will save around £5 billion by 2029-30. We must wait until the OBR comes with its final findings ahead of the statement. I will leave honourable members with theirs. The former Chancellor George Osborne said a decade ago, governments that employ people, he mentioned disability figures do not get counted because they are embarrassed about the position. We are ashamed of the state the Tories left our country. We face up to our responsibilities and it is time honourable members opposite did the same.

 opposite did the same.
13:03
13:05
13:06
13:08
13:09
13:09
13:10
13:11
13:12
13:12
13:13
13:14
13:15
Marie Tidball Portrait Dr Marie Tidball MP (Penistone and Stocksbridge, Labour)
-
-
After 14 years of Conservative failure, there is a 29% employment gap and a 17% pay gap for disabled people in this country. Therefore we must make sure the social model is central to government decision making to achieve inclusive growth that enables disabled people to fulfil their potential. I welcome her proactive approach to reasonable adjustments and the billion pounds support package to get disabled people back to work where they can work. As well as her recognition that PIP is designed as an in work benefit to enable people to live independently.

Research shows the supportive incentive-based approach massively outperformed cuts or sanctions in getting disabled people into sustainable employment. What work has she done to devote inclusive growth strategies across all employment sectors to close the disability and employment gap and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I agree with my right honourable friend. This is part of our mission, providing equal rights and choices providing equal rights and choices for disabled people to work as anybody else. We will be working with disabled people at the organisations that represent them to organisations that represent them to develop our Pathways to work employment support, so we get it employment support, so we get it right. We won't do that unless we work closely with disabled people. We are also working right across government.

We have disability ministers in every single government ministers in every single government department. They are driving this agenda forward. I know that my right agenda forward. I know that my right honourable friend will give much valued advice and help to make sure we get it in every part of this government.
13:17
13:17
13:18
13:18
13:19
13:19
13:20
13:20
13:21
13:21
13:22
13:22
13:23
13:23
13:24
13:25
13:25
13:26
13:27
13:28
13:29
13:29
13:30
13:30
13:31
13:31
13:32
13:33
13:34
13:34
13:35
13:36
13:36
13:37
13:38
13:39
13:39
13:39
13:39
13:40
13:41
13:41
13:42
13:42
13:43
13:43
13:44
13:45
13:46
13:46
13:47
13:47
13:48
13:48
13:49
13:50
13:50
13:51
13:51
13:52
13:53
13:53
13:54
13:54
13:55
13:56
13:57
13:57
13:57
13:58
13:59
14:00
14:00
14:00
14:01
14:01
14:01
14:02
14:02
14:03
14:03
14:04
14:04
14:05
14:06
14:06
14:07
14:07
14:08
14:08
14:09
14:10
14:10
14:11
14:12
14:12
14:12
14:13
14:14
14:14
14:15
14:15
14:15
14:16
14:16
14:16
14:17
14:17
14:18
14:18
14:19
14:20
14:20
14:21
14:21
14:22
14:22
14:23
14:23
14:24
14:24
14:25
14:26
14:26
14:27
14:27
14:27
14:28
14:28
14:29
14:29
14:30
14:31
14:31
14:31
14:32
14:32
14:32
14:33
14:33
14:34
14:35
14:35
14:36
14:37
14:38
Rachel Taylor Portrait Rachel Taylor MP (North Warwickshire and Bedworth, Labour)
-
-
I beg to move that leave be given to bring a bill to make provision about the recording and investigation of freight crime and for connected purposes. I thank my honourable friend for Selby, the Minister being present today. Shortly after being elected in July, became the chair of the freight and logistics APPG. Because almost 1/5 of my constituents work in this vital sector, and I want to make sure they had a voice in Parliament. The freight and logistics sector has become the backbone of the local economy in North Warwickshire and Bedworth with businesses located across the constituency.

And since becoming an MP, I've had the pleasure of visiting many of these businesses to see how they are providing varied opportunities for people in North Warwickshire and Bedworth. I want the logistics sector to be something young people in my constituency are excited to be part of, and that means we must tackle freight crime so they can feel safe in their jobs. I am proud that North Warwickshire and Bedworth contributes so much to our national economy by getting goods and medical supplies to the people who need them up and down the country.

But from speaking to drivers and businesses across the country, it's clear that one of the biggest issues facing this industry is organised freight crime. So with the Road haulage Association, the National Vehicle Crime Intelligence Service, and freight businesses, recently launched our APPG report into freight crime to provide a framework for how the government can secure our supply chains. Our report highlighted a key misconception. Too many people think theft from a van or lorry as low-level opportunistic crime. It is not true.

Freight crime is committed by organised criminal gangs. It's dangerous and costs the UK economy £1 billion since 2020. More action is urgently needed. I'd like to thank the Home Office and Department of Transport for their engagement with our campaign. I know they understand the need to tackle this critical issue, and statistics have shown that the investment they've made in safe parking has paid off. The number of crimes taking place at truck stops has reduced, which I hope demonstrates to the government that targeted action to combat freight crime is producing results.

I recent met with the Minister for policing fire and crime prevention, and to welcome her recognition that freight crime is a challenge that must be tackled if we are to achieve our mission of economic growth. We need to see more action on freight crime, and the situation is urgent. Between 2023 and 24, the total value of goods stolen by freight criminals increased by 63% to more than 120 to more than £120 million. I visited Cawley services my constituency to see how they are tackling freight crime at their service station.

Even crime at their service station. Even if introduced measures to make drivers and parked vehicles safer, they are clear that more must be done. I spoke to Dave Hans, the managing director of LTS global in my constituency. About how freight crime has impacted his business. He told me that he has experienced three fuel theft last year. LTS loses a day of delivery, must replace the fuel, pay off all our fee to restore the vehicle and get them to the nearest garage.

This has to stop. This type of crime can often be violent. Organised gangs target drivers who are sleeping in layby is as they know it's then that they are most vulnerable to theft. For example info grew 2024, five men threatened a driver in an Essex layby with a handgun before stealing layby with a handgun before stealing his cargo. The driver was left terrified and despite an extensive area search, the police didn't identify any suspects. Similarly in West Yorkshire last summer, thieves threatened a driver with a hammer and stole £250,000 worth of products from the vehicle.

Once again, no one from the vehicle. Once again, no one was court. Freight crime and -- freight criminals are becoming more sophisticated, and stolen trailers laden with laptops, household appliances and medical supplies from transport hubs right across the Midlands. Organised freight criminals sees opportunities of good shortages to target cargo that is increasing in value, such as baby formula and PPE during the pandemic. In a particularly cruel case, freight criminals stole over £1 million worth of government funded laptops meant for deprived children.

Luckily three men were caught and sent to prison. As a House, we must understand that organised freight crime feeds into other organised crime where gangs have a large underground network of handlers who reintroduce large amount of stolen cargo back to the public to buy. It's even ended up on our supermarket shelves. Staggeringly, in the most extreme and dangerous examples, freight criminals can even steal from vehicles while they are moving. Last year in HIV make HDV was driving while the driver realised the lock been cut while it was driving and over £3 million worth of smartphones, watches and laptops were stolen.

This type of operation were criminal gangs drive erratically to target a moving vehicle and tailgate it is dangerous to everyone on the road. I've spoken to everyone on the road. I've spoken to police in Warwickshire. They know freight crime is becoming increasingly organised, targeted and dangerous yet they are struggling to track and tackle it effectively as an organised gang stealing thousands of pounds worth of goods from a lorry and someone stealing a mobile phone from the passenger seat of a car are coded in the same way by the police.

I'm sure no one in this House things that make sense. That's why this bill is needed. This bill would create a separate crime code for freight theft from a vehicle with the specific code and classification large-scale thefts of freight goods would be categorised differently, allowing police to respond to them as organised and targeted freight theft rather than lumped together with domestic car break-ins and other car crime. This would help police to deal with incidents more effectively in real time, call handlers can ask specific questions and follow responses and procedures specific to freight crime.

Allowing police to respond to incidents faster and more appropriately. And stop them patterns from slipping through the cracks. It would mean we could collect meaningful data. The moment the majority of data on freight crime is put together by the National vehicle crime intelligence police service, an organisation which receives no government funding. Police forces currently don't have to report their freight crime incidents, so there are counties where we have no data at all on how much freight crime is taking place. Separate crime code would mean all police forces could track freight crime instances, target freight crime hotspots in the county and create a national strategy with other police forces to chase down perpetrators across counties.

This bill will improve police effectiveness when dealing with organised freight criminals, and I hope it will help us tackle the problem and come up with a national freight crime strategy. Almost 20% of workers in North Warwickshire and Bedworth work in the freight and logistics sector, and they should not have to feel scared and threatened while doing their jobs. Freight and logistics businesses would quite literally keep our country running should not have to be shouldering regular losses because of cargo theft. The police should not be hamstrung in tackling serious organised crime because they cannot retrieve the data they need to coordinate a national freight strategy.

And ordinary consumers should not be left to pick up the bill. Organised freight crime gangs have been left to grow for too long but this simple change should help stop them in their tracks. It's time we take tough action on freight crime, introduced a new freight crime code and put these thieves behind bars

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that the honourable member have leave to bring in the bill. As many as of that opinion say, "Aye." To the that opinion say, "Aye." To the contrary, say, "No." The ayes have

**** Possible New Speaker ****

contrary, say, "No." The ayes have it. We will bring in the bill? Christine Jardine, Josh Newbury,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Christine Jardine, Josh Newbury, Sureena Brackenridge, and myself, Freight Freight Crime Freight Crime Bill Freight Crime Bill second Freight Crime Bill second reading, what day?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

June 20. The clerk will proceed to read the orders of the day.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to read the orders of the day. Children's Wellbeing and Schools

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Bill, to be further considered. We will begin with clause 17,
14:48
None Portrait Legislation: Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill: Remaining Stages (Day 2)
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

We will begin with clause 17, with which it will be convenient to with which it will be convenient to consider clauses I've left it on the selection paper for day two. I call

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the Minister to move. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Let me start by thanking the honourable members on all sides of the House for the valuable contribution to the debate so far. This bill is for children and the clue is in the name. It is far their clue is in the name. It is far their safety, education, futures, that we safety, education, futures, that we bring this forward. The government is on a mission to break down barriers to opportunity for each and barriers to opportunity for each and every child and this bill is a significant step on that path.

I welcome the debate the bill has sparked because after a decade where education has been on the sidelines, labour mages bringing it to the centre of national life, the place centre of national life, the place that it always occupies under Labour Government. Education is at the heart of how we ensure opportunities for the next generations. I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the right honourable lady for a giving way. In terms of the last 12-14 years past, schools in last 12-14 years past, schools in Walsall, which is a very diverse borough with areas of deprivation, would she join me in acknowledging would she join me in acknowledging the fact that our schools have outperformed national figures for the first time at the end of last the first time at the end of last year with 91% of schools in Walsall graded as good or better, showing steady increase and you're not just the Conservative government but the fantastic Conservative-led local councils.

councils.
14:49
Catherine McKinnell Portrait Catherine McKinnell MP, Minister of State (Education) (Newcastle upon Tyne North, Labour)
-
-
I will always share in the celebration of schools doing well and the honourable lady is right to do so in her particular area. I sometimes question, though, the sense of shame were sprayed sometimes seen by the record of her government and that they left office with English schools getting worse standards in reading, maths, science, riffs crumbling, a generation of children absent from school and these are challenges we school and these are challenges we are determined to take head on because the education we provide for our children is not just for each of the futures but for all of us.

It is shipping the society that we want today and the society that we want to build tomorrow.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am grateful to the Minister for whom I have respect and whom I have respect and consideration. Will she share with the House the fact that schools in the House the fact that schools in England are better today than 2010 and a set of picking a subset of and a set of picking a subset of time is not a fair assessment and time is not a fair assessment and schools are demonstrably better today than 2010. Please at least acknowledge that.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

acknowledge that. I thank the honourable gentleman for his kind words and the assumption of my honesty. The fact is that one in three children are starting school not ready for school and we have over one third leaving primary school without a firm primary school without a firm foundation in reading, writing, foundation in reading, writing, mathematics, and a disadvantage gap that is widening. I will come to what we want to achieve as a what we want to achieve as a government but we are not satisfied, as the other party appears to be, as the other party appears to be, with leaving some children without the start in life that they deserve and we want it for all children and that is for these changes will achieve.

It is essential that every child and family has the certainty that they will be able to access a good local school that will set high expectations and standards for all children, enabling them to achieve and thrive. We bring forward For reform and also in the issues where legislation is not needed, we are designing a system that supports and challenges all skills to deliver for our children with a rich and broad curriculum delivered by expertly trained teachers with an attractive salary that retains the staff that children need.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

In that spirit, I wonder if she would look at the new clause 30 which calls on the government to review the effectiveness of review the effectiveness of education and learning for young people at primary school and people at primary school and secondary school. Will she acknowledge as we try to put right the mental health pandemic we have in the country that building resilience in education is not just resilience in education is not just good for that but the ability to rely on themselves and to be in situations where they are not situations where they are not To have more willing to learn.

Is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this a moment to invest in education for every part of the country? The honourable gentleman is committed to this as a cause and committed to this as a cause and understandably so because he comes from a part of the country that from a part of the country that boasts incredible scenery and activities that I am sure many of us have shared. He is right to want have shared. He is right to want that for all children and that is that for all children and that is part of the changes we bring today, to make sure we can unlock opportunity for all children up and down the country.

By creating the down the country. By creating the floor but no ceiling on what skills can offer, enabling healthy competition and the core set of frameworks and standards will be can improve our schools and schools will have the freedom and ability to deliver the enrichment program that deliver the enrichment program that he saw rightly advocates for and also those high and rising standards for all children. I will give way again.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

When it comes to freedoms and flexibility, does she not understand flexibility, does she not understand the freedoms and flexibility that can come from allowing a school to have flexibility over the curriculum?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

curriculum? Try as they made to make the strawman argument, this labour government will demand higher government will demand higher standards for all children and in recent polls it shows despite all recent polls it shows despite all the scaremongering there is nothing to fear from the sensible, pragmatic and commonsense measures that will drive standards up in every school. Academies have grown from a government-backed insurgency in schools and now make up well over 50% of the school system.

It is not about to change. I know that the Member for Sevenoaks will be pleased to hear the conversions to academy status are progressing faster under labour back ministers than at any time since she joined the House and it is right to look forward and consider how to build a system that is fit for the next 20 years. This bill is a step on that path and recognises in the words of one leader didn't deserve clarity and confidence in the standards that confidence in the standards that School pulse.

Following on from my honourable friend, the Minister of Early Education led the debate yesterday, I will use my opening remarks to set up the amendments put forward for part two and three of the bill. Members commented on the number of amendments yesterday but the number that are substantive are small and I will focus on them today. Many members have great interest in city technology colleges and colleges for the technology of the arts members have raised the excellent practice supported by these institutions and the amendments the government are tabling today ensures the schools On school admission orders and makes it clear that families with children attending these schools will benefit from the measures in the EPL such as doors tackling the cost of school uniform.

As we are committed to work with all skills, so as to government determined to work with devolved governments for the higher standards of education and care in all parts of the UK and the majority of the amendments to the including the extension of the pro-British to school and the Minister for education spoke yesterday about pride in working with the Welsh government and Labour governments in Cardiff and London to deliver a shared ambition for a society where all children receive high quality education whatever they grow up, building a Britain where children come first and saw these 91 amendments will extend all of the children not in school measures to Wales and the legislative panel is engaged in this and we are working closely with the Welsh government and Amendment 140 will include the Scottish definition for schools and this amendment is essential because it shows only those children intended to be captured by the register are eligible for registration and without the amendment a child that lives in England but attend school full-time in Scotland will be required to be registered on the English local authority register despite being in school full time and passed the last government said there was in the King's Speech for children safety and education, for Labour, children and a priority across the UK and and a priority across the UK and amendments 189 and 170 will ensure this extends to the whole United Kingdom on parenting.

Education is an essential protective factor which concealed the most vulnerable children from harm and the Children Not in School measures will deal with protection plans and inquires to seek local government consent but not every child subject to these inquires will be at risk indefinitely and thought would not be proportionate for those children not at risk and receiving suitable education to be placed in a school if it is not the preference of the appearance. This government will respect the rights of parents to opt for home education by keeping children safe from harm and securing the right for education and so amendments 141, 142, 148 are brought forward to make sure this is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

reflected in the bill. I will give way. I thank the Minister for giving

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Minister for giving way. Can she reassure parents that requirements in the bill will not be overly onerous? Having to record the overly onerous? Having to record the time that each child educates the time that each child educates the child. When is that? 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year? How would that work? Can she give some reassurance this will be manageable and sensible and not disproportionate? disproportionate?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Children who are being home educated and provided with suitable education in a safe environment have nothing to be concerned about in relation to these measures. These are intended to ensure that no child falls through the cracks and that is falls through the cracks and that is what we are delivering. Clause 17

**** Possible New Speaker ****

relates to... I am absolutely sure the intention of the Minister is to intention of the Minister is to ensure this does not happen and if people are doing fewer hours per people are doing fewer hours per week, does not have to be recorded? I do not know how much the Minister knows about higher education but children are educated in all sorts of places and I think there is a real opportunity now to say she will come forward with the regulations that make sure they are not having to write down every time that they stop at an ice cream shop because there was an issue about the flavour there was an issue about the flavour

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The amendments I'm addressing at the moment particularly in relation to information sharing, which clearly has concerns about, but clearly has concerns about, but members on all sides of the House will be all too aware of the succession of tragedies that we have succession of tragedies that we have seen when children fall between the cracks in services that should be cracks in services that should be there to support them. And the intention and purpose of the change has been brought forward in this has been brought forward in this legislation is a reflection of this government's determination to bring government's determination to bring back that era of state failure to close.

So no clause 17 relates to the measures and opening new schools stop at two of the Education and Inspections Act 2006, which the bill is amending, includes a number of relevant duties and powers where personal data might be processed, for example by a proposal for a new school includes details of the relevant experience of the individual proposes. No clause 17 makes clear that these powers and duties to give or publish information do not give anyone the right to give or publish personal data in a way that would breach data data in a way that would breach data protection legislation.

It applies a data protection override for the whole of party and schedule 2.2, the Education and Inspections Act 2006 to cover all of the information related powers and duties in relation to opening, closing and altering schools, and amendment 168 son 167 will ensure that restrictions on the sharing of data, obligations of confidence under the restrictions do not prevent the sharing of information when this is done to protect the welfare of children at registered independent educational institutions or in accommodation provided by schools or colleges.

Amendments 166 and 167 empower OFSTED effectively to disclose information to other inspectorates of independent educational institutions or accommodation in schools or colleges to enable their inspections and ensure high quality services for our children. We are to smooth the information to be shared for these purposes may include information given in confidence, perhaps for instance, information shared with whistleblowers. We think information that would protect a child's well- being should not be hampered in this imperative should override concerns about bridging confidence.

Amendments 190 and 191 are essential because of the new powers of the bill for local authorities to share data from the children not in school registers with agencies listed in section 11 of the children's act 2004 and OFSTED in line with well established practices and share information to protect and promote the well-being of children stop these amendments will ensure that local authorities can have confidence that they are acting in the children's best interest when doing so. There are well-established processes and existing expectations on these agencies to share information to protect and promote the well-being of children.

Without this amendment local authorities and agencies may become concerned that they will be restricted in the information they can share or received from the not in school registers. This information is relevant to help local authorities undertaking safeguarding, welfare and education related to children so it's crucial that it can be shared when appropriate. In summary, these amendments serve to strengthen the bill and ensure it works as intended to keep children safe, to secure their education, and ensure that they all each and every family can access a brilliant local school which is the cornerstone of opportunity for every child.

So thank honourable and right honourable members once again for their scrutiny and challenge on this bill so far, and I look forward to listening to the debate because I know there is no subject on which the House feels so passionately as the future of our children, and the steps that we must take to ensure that each and every one of them can

**** Possible New Speaker ****

achieve and thrive. The question is the new clause 17 read a second time. I called the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

shadow Minister. This bill doesn't set out any

**** Possible New Speaker ****

This bill doesn't set out any kind of clear plan or vision for our schools. It doesn't address the big challenges that do need addressing. It's silent on discipline and behaviour, one of the biggest issues. And it comes after they have scrapped simple Ofsted judgements and will be followed by moves to
15:05
Neil O'Brien Portrait Neil O'Brien MP (Harborough, Oadby and Wigston, Conservative)
-
-
and will be followed by moves to dumb down the curriculum and lower standards further. This active state has no positive vision. She has axed programs for advanced maths, physics, Latin and computing she thinks they are elitist. She's axed the behaviour helps with no replacement even though schools that went through them were twice as likely to be good or outstanding, and yet somehow she is able to find £19 million for advertising. But this bill is the worst of all. We have numerous amendments down today for it takes a wrecking ball to 40 years of cross-party reform of England schools, and those reforms worked.

There is much more to do of course but England has risen up the international league tables, even as Labour in Wales has slumped down. Under successive governments of all colours, England schools have been improved by the magic formula of freedom plus accountability. But this bill attacks both parts of that formula. On the one hand stripping Academy schools of freedom of recruitment, curriculum and reimposing incredible levels of micromanagement, taking away academy freedoms now enjoyed by 82% of secondary schools. On the other hand stroking accountability of parental choice, ending the automatic transfer of failing schools to new management, reversing the reforms of the late 1980s which allowed good schools to expand without permission from the local authority, a reform which ushered in parental choice.

Let me unpack this. First the bill takes away academy choices over curriculum. And as said Dan Monaghan leads the incredibly successful Harrow school has explained, we've taken over failing schools in disadvantaged parts of London and found students unable to read or write, varied the curriculum in the short and narrowed the number of subjects in key stage 3 to maximise the amount of time for literacy and numeracy as the children were not able to access the other subjects. Why take with the flexibility to do what is needed locally? That's what he asks.

Likewise Luke sparks from Dixons argues winning the flexibility to enact the curriculum in a responsive and responsible way at local level. There needs to be consistency without staffing education, and Michaela school which has been top in the country three years in a row as had Catherine has written to the second state to say do you have any idea of the work that would be required from teachers and school leaders to change the curriculum? You will force heads to deliver precious resources to fulfil the bureaucratic whim.

Are you changing things? What's the problem you are trying to solve? Nor is it just...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Grateful. He liked me vines these

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Grateful. He liked me vines these proposals tragic because of the removal of the curriculum freedoms which have allowed schools like Michaela, Petchey, schools allow the Michaela, Petchey, schools allow the country to tailor the curriculum specifically to reach disadvantaged specifically to reach disadvantaged pupils so that they are able to engage better with their learning and achievement that previously didn't have, and that door is being closed, and I hope that members opposite may reflect on this and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

opposite may reflect on this and seek to see a change of policy if not in this House, at least in the House of Lords. Is completely correct and some others opposite have reflected on this. In fact the Labour member for Mitcham & Morden that the proposal to make it compulsory for academies to teach the National Curriculum was of particular concern to her. And ministers have never explained what they are trying to solve through this change. Into the bill echoes.

Further amendments Dominic UTS, the governors getting rid of academy freedoms over recruitment and the freedom to employ teachers. So Martin Oliver from OFSTED give a good example of how these are used. He said in the past I have brought in professional sports people to teach alongside PE teachers, they run sessions because I was in Wakefield it was Rugby League, and professionals working with about 1/4 of the schools in Wakefield employed. Brilliant. And the governance and impact assessments as of this change, some schools may struggle to find the teachers they need as a result.

Rebecca Lee from the Suffolk Head Teachers Association example of how this freedom is currently used, said I totally needed in early years lead and although she was actually needing it, she was able to take on someone who had run an outstanding nursery given that they didn't have to UTS or planned to get it, but in future she wouldn't be able to do that. And a former head teacher David Thomas told us during the Bill committee, this freedom allows us to recruit people who may be at the end of their career, have a huge amount of experience, want to give back to the community, don't want to go through bureaucracy and we put up barriers, they won't end up in the state sector.

And ministers have not produced a shred of evidence that teachers without UTS are of low quality or why they can't be a good supplement to UTS teachers and ministers have narrow spine when they think that city in Whitehall they think they are in a better position to judge you to employ than Head Teachers in the front line. Ministers claim this is vital, but a footnote at the bottom of page 24 of the impact assessment reveals it would in fact not be applied to loss of front types of schools, including 40 to 90 academies, universities, technical colleges, studio schools, further education colleges, non- maintained school early years settings, so it's supposedly vital but not being applied to loads of different types of school and yet ministers are imposing it on those of other schools.

As the former head of Ofsted point of this week, taking the flexibility out of the system feels like a retrograde step, but with this bill micromanagement from Whitehall is back too." For allows the secretary of state to direct academy schools to do pretty much anything and the Confederation of school trusts are really worried about this and they suggested a way to bring this unlimited power under surveillance for that they say we do have concerns about the power to direct. It's too broad and wide.

We'd like to work with government to restrict it to creating greater limits and they should be run statutory duties, guidance, provisions in the funding agreement, yet ministers voted down our amendment to put the suggestion from schools into effect. Likewise clause 34 as we discovered in Bill committee, clause 34.5.2 will require academy schools to get permission from the secretary of state to make any change to the buildings they occupy, this includes, " Any change to the part of the building or permanent outdoor structure." So literally if an academy school wants to build a bike shed, it will have to go to the Secretary of State, and it was clear during Bill committee that ministers had not even realised this would apply to academy schools.

And those are just two of the many many centralising measures in this bill. So on the one hand while freedom has been taken away, accountability on the other side of the ledger is being watered down too full to the governor got rid of 'Ofsted judgements and replace them with something much more complicated which doesn't seem to have left anyone happy. And clause 52 ends the academies role... The way they automatically become academies provides politicisation and a rapid transition.

I fear making that discretionary will result in a large amount of judicial reviews and prolonged uncertainty which is in nobody's interests. And she said the DFA will find itself mired in the high courts in judicial review. When we try to transfer our first failing school from Harris Academy, we spent two years in court and the children don't have that time to waste. Rob Tarn, Chief Executive of the Northern education trust has made the same point. He says if there is no longer a known blanket reality, there is a risk that words be determined the school needs to join a strong trust, it will take much longer and will go back to the early days of academy station where people went to court.

And the children's Commissioner makes this point too. She says I'm deeply concerned we are legislating against the things we know work in schools and we risk children spending longer in failing schools by slowing down the pace of school improvement. She is right. The Confederation of school trust said the current system offers struggling schools clarity that they will join a trust and the process can begin immediately. In contrast they warn, we are not clear how commissioning part-time support through the rice teams makes that any easier.

They are right. And the former national schools commissioner Sir David Carter has warned that the arguments and legal actions that will arise if a school in Cumbria is told to join a trust or a school in Cornwall gets arms up support, will only delay affair and better option for children, and worse still is close for one, which attacks school choice and the freedom to go to good schools. It was in 1997 that Mrs Thatcher announced May 1987, she said we will allow popular schools to take in as many children as space will permit on this.

Local authorities from putting artificially low limits on entry to good schools. And that agenda became known as local management of schools, and that the former Labour minister wrote local management of schools was an Allied and almost immediate success. School budgets under LMS were based largely on pupil numbers so parental choice came to matter as never before, and in contrast the government's assessment of this bill, its own impact assessment said we want the local authority to have more influence over the planned admission numbers than schools in the area and that impact assessment says it could also limit the ability of popular schools to grow.

If a school is required to lower their ambition number, some pupils who would otherwise have been admitted will be unable to attend the school, which will negatively impact on parental preference. Michael Johnsen the leader of the very successful Cholmondeley school trust warns of this and, " Could be disastrous for successful schools will stop the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Which school a child attends than parents." Grateful. Do they like me reflect on the irony that the success from on the irony that the success from 2010 to 2024 which we on these benches would naturally celebrate, actually was only possible because actually was only possible because of the Labour vision who drove the academies program forward, make changes, develop the argument, rolled the pitch and allowed us to rolled the pitch and allowed us to lift our schools so much higher levels of performance and our children from deprived backgrounds children from deprived backgrounds to so much better results.

And it is Labour that where the creators of this, and now this government is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

disowning it. It's tragic. It is not us that are criticising this bill. It's the professionals and people who have given their lives to education. Another example, Gareth Stephens the leader of the inspiration trust, another great trust, he gives the example of his local council wanting to halve places at an outstanding school in order to prop up other schools, he says the idea that we could have the rug pulled out from under us and the number of places in a high performing scorecard is the most worrying thing, will mean fewer places that high performing or And the bill allows the local authority to object to the current admission numbers at any school anywhere in the country for so this became apparent during Bill committee.

So there will be more disputes with local hoodie is trying to push down numbers in neighbouring authorities and I suspect faith and slate of schools will be particularly in the crosshairs of some of the more ideological left- wing authorities. There is nothing in the bill to stop the hills adjudicator from being able to set zero or to shut a school, we tried to amend the bill to stop school performance or at least require school performance to be taken into account when making decisions on pupil numbers, but amazingly the When there are going to be dramatic cuts in numbers, it is clear schools will shock regardless of the rules but if there is a choice, it will be deflected by parents voting with their feet and will depend on the ideological and political views of the local councillors.

This bill is removing power from parents to politicians. This week we have seen further criticism from people who have devoted a whole life to improving education with the former head of Ofsted saying it is levelling down and calling on the Secretary of State to think again. Also, it has been said, "I think it would be a show of strength to pass the bill being part of the bill but consider the rest." And a backer of Labour at the last election said, "We want better schools for everyone and this bill will do the opposite, harming the most disadvantaged families and I hope Labour will think again." We will fight on to stop this misguided, destructive, and very depressing bill.

.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to speak in support of new clauses 1, two, and Amendment two in my name. The amount of time afforded to the Education Select Committee to undertake detailed scrutiny was undertake detailed scrutiny was limited and we were only able to look at part two of the bill and
15:18
Helen Hayes Portrait Helen Hayes MP (Dulwich and West Norwood, Labour)
-
-
sought to not duplicate the evidence taken by the bill committee and took limited evidence on the changes to the role of local authorities with regard to school admissions but as an MP whose constituents have suffered the consequences of fragmentation of the policies and planning over the past 14 years resulting in school places being delivered in areas where they were not needed and undermining local schools councils struggle to ensure the delivery of school places at, particularly for children with SEND, and there were local places a popular school being allocated, not to families, but children across south London and so I wholeheartedly support attempts to restore coherence to the role of local authorities and I support the measures to reduce the cost of school uniform for families by limiting the number of items and that is a significant cost of living pressure for families but I encourage the government to keep careful watch on how this requirement is being complied with, particularly with relation to the cost of places and I had from an appalling example of a vulnerable child he was allocated a place at a good school but all she could not attend until she was wearing a blazer which cost more than £100 which was way beyond the means of family and I the Minister would agree no child should be shut out of the classroom because they are family could not afford the very close for them to wear and that is the intention of the bill and monitoring the detail will be important and I welcome the measures to introduce a register of home education children.

It is the right option for some children but the number of children going missing from the education, out of sight, without regulation into the education they are receiving and sometimes coming to harm us in a horrific recent case is deeply concerning the measures in the bill will help to address. The Education Select Committee welcomes the introduction of breakfast clubs which will help ensure no child starts the school be hungry but we also read compelling evidence of the importance of school lunches for the most poor children.

Around one in 10 children eligible for free school meals do not claim them because parents and carers do not complete the administrative process and this can be because of difficulty in the process itself, lack of awareness about entitlement, language barriers. Children from non-faith backgrounds are more likely to be unregistered and this has impacts on skills since the ability to draw down pupil premium funding is linked to the registration for school meals. I am talking about the entitlement and not the new spending commit meant and free school meals for children and well being and these benefits are being seen in local authorities which are doing auto enrolment of children including Middlesbrough, Cleveland, and some areas affected because the Mayor of London is funding the school meals already.

It was founded by local authorities were successful in the mission to reduce the number of eligible children missing out, it was a difficult and resource- intensive task and the data sharing between relevant authorities needed to register children automatically was not straightforward. The local authorities piloting auto enrolment authorities piloting auto enrolment have called for the central government to step in and help with the committee recommending the government introduce auto enrolment for children already eligible for free school meals at the recommendation would ensure between 200,000 and 250,000 additional families of the most poor children in the country will receive the meals they are entitled to.

The recommendation is reflected in the new clause 1 and I got the government will support it today. In Amendment two, the committee took evidence from breakfast clubs and heard about the benefits and ensuring children do not start this will be hungry and in terms of the opportunity afforded by the breakfast clubs for the children to play with their friends. We heard about the need for breakfast to be provided on a flexible basis within the clubs so children whose families are not able to get them to school early and may be among the most vulnerable children do not mess out on this vital meal.

The committee has heard extensive evidence in the committee on SEND about the difficulties families of disabled children have finding childcare and extracurricular activities at this vital they can access the records clubs on equal footing with their peers which may involve additional cost in terms of school transport and the need to have staff on site at the time of the breakfast club and I welcome that this includes around 50 specialist skills but the inclusion of children with SEND and breakfast clubs and mainstream skills is essential I hope the government was closely at early adopters aren't any additional support required to ensure this is the case.

Amendment two will ensure the face of the bill that children with SEND can access breakfast clubs and I call the government will support it. Finally I turned to clause 2. This is a large bill, covering many areas and it has been taken through the House quickly and taken through the House quickly and is not subject to any changes and Changes and a number of measures in the bill will be contingent on government policies not in the bill for success, including the Curriculum and Assessment Review, reforms to the Ofsted assessment framework at the Child Poverty That Was.

Amendment Two Would Require Regular Reviews by the Secretary Of State on the Impact. I Would Anticipate Such Reviews Which Your Positive Impact from the Legislation and Having a Clear Monitoring and Reporting mechanism is good practice, particularly for a bill of this size which has been delivered so quickly. I welcome the intention of the bill and the measures it contains and I look forward to supporting it this evening and my committee looks forward to playing a constructive role in scrutinising

**** Possible New Speaker ****

its impact. Thank you very much, Madam Deputy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much, Madam Deputy A number of measures in part two of the bill to be welcomed. However, after a decade of neglect by the Conservatives, I want to as the Conservatives, I want to as the ministers this - when our schools are crumbling and we cannot find are crumbling and we cannot find specialist teachers and specialist provision is in crisis and we have huge persistent absence problems, why has the government chosen to tinker with academies and governance arrangements as the priority education policy? One strong message comes through from education leaders including those with no ideological axe to grind, that there is a lack of coherent vision for the school system shown in the way the government has gone about part two of the bill with no quite no consultation of those on the frontline or in leadership positions across the sector but turning to some new clauses tabled in my name and with all the pressures of family finances, Amendment seven bit ensure free school meals are available to children from households earning less than £20,000 per year and automatically enrolling eligible children to this provision.

The Liberal Democrats have long believed it is an effective and targeted intervention which would help children at both primary and secondary school in property and would help them to concentrate and would help them to concentrate and Would require the Secretary of State to see how many children are eligible but not claiming funding. It beggars belief that the
15:27
Munira Wilson Portrait Munira Wilson MP (Twickenham, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
government are flying blind on this issue, but the last proper study of issue, but the last proper study of update dating back to 2013. And NC54 would require regular reviews of would require regular reviews of uptake and as we discussed and I the chair of the Select Committee pointed, an estimated 230,000 or so pointed, an estimated 230,000 or so eligible children are missing out on a free school meal where local authorities do to rule the children into the free school meals, it makes a real difference.

Durham is led by the Liberal Democrats and 2500 additional schoolchildren now benefit from a hot lunch and the skill benefits from an additional £3 million in pupil premium funding. In Minister confirmed the government's intention to improve uptake by looking at auto enrolment and data sharing between departments. However, his suggestion that locally led efforts are more likely to meet the needs of local communities risks patchy action across the country and we believe it requires a national response and therefore we strongly urge the government to look at auto enrolment as well as increasing the eligibility threshold so we are feeding some of the most poor children, whether they are at primary or secondary school.

Staying on the theme of the cost of living pressures on families, on the Liberal Democrat benches, we strongly support bringing down the cost of school uniforms for hard- pressed families up and down the country but remain concerned that the legislation as drafted, setting a maximum number of branded uniform items, is highly prescriptive for schools and will not actually bring in the course of the items. There is nothing to stop, as the chair of the Select Committee pointed, nothing to stop items costing £100 or more each and furthermore, in an answer to a question I tabled, it stated that on average uniforms for girls cost £25-30 more than those for boys.

To tackle these inequalities, the best thing to do is to support Amendment one. I want to put my thanks on record to the clerks. They picked up a drafting error in the amendment and saw online the amendment is correct but the printed version is incorrect. Amendment one actually immense clause 24 and proposes a modest recap rather than a cap on the number of items and that will be reviewed and updated in line with inflation through secondary education every year and will also drive down costs as suppliers compete for school contracts.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Will she give way?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Will she give way? She mentioned the PM to answers -

**** Possible New Speaker ****

She mentioned the PM to answers - while she is surprised to see that if the school specified a badge to if the school specified a badge to be sewn onto otherwise generic school blazer that the badge would school blazer that the badge would That was a solution to stay in the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

price cap, apparently that won't be allowed. Just reflecting on the statement

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Just reflecting on the statement you made, that there is a potential drafting error. If that is indeed the case, has she made arrangements the case, has she made arrangements to ensure the correct version of the amendment is in publication?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, yes, we've been in touch with the clerks who have amended the amendment online. So the amended the amendment online. So the printed version is incorrect, but the online version should be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

amended, clause 24 instead of clause 23. We will ensure that process has taken place.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

taken place. Thank you. At committee, the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. At committee, the Minister of State's response to me on this amendment was that a cost cap rather than an item cap was too cap rather than an item cap was too complex, risk reducing choice for parents by increasing schools parents by increasing schools reliance on specific suppliers. And she also suggested there would be she also suggested there would be regional variation in pricing of uniforms. On the regional variation point, again, having tabled a PQ on Thursday has been no analysis by government to show there is regional variation in uniform prices.

I was going to suggest that the schools that want more branding on items within a cost cap that they could indeed so on all stick-on logos onto plain jumpers and other items that are bought cheaply in supermarkets, which I believe the government is suggesting that they want parents to have choice, and that would give them the choice of going to a well- known supermarket brand and then the school perhaps asking them to put a logo on. So I am quite shocked to hear the PQ that the right honourable gentleman has tabled, I will look at it afterwards.

Our Amendment one would guarantee to put pounds and pennies back in parents pockets, and avoid top-down meddling from Whitehall on school uniform policy. I also -- also on school uniforms, in C 12 concerns a simple matter of fairness. The zero rate of VAT applies only on children up to the age of 14, in committee the Minister cited the cost of the exchequer of making this change but the government -- if the government's aim is to bring down uniform prices can I humbly suggest they press the Chancellor to look at this particular amendment.

It's a simple change to make. Turning to special needs, as I said at the outset this is operably the biggest burning priority for school leaders that I speak to up and down the country. It certainly is for members up and down this house, when we see the number of members who are involved in SEND in this place. It would dedicate a new national body for SEND which would ensure high needs provision and see that children receiving -- in need of high complexity needs get it.

Costs up to Rob -- trebled since 2015, educational outcomes for SEND pupils remain stagnant. We need to reform the system. I know she is busy working on this, I would say a national body would help reduce the postcode lottery for those with the highest needs, and actually there is a growing body of people out there and experts in the sector who are starting to suggest a national body can gather evidence on the efficacy of various SEND interventions. I would suggest such a national body could do that.

Yesterday I said it was very surprising that a bill entitled children's wellbeing bill actually has very little content on well-being in it. New clause 9 would place a duty on school governing bodies to ensure every school in England, primary or secondary, has a dedicated mental health practitioner on site, given the huge growing mental health crisis in young people. The government has said it is committed to mental health support in every school, but it's clear when I pressed the Minister in the chamber last week when we had a debate on Thursday on this issue that the support the government is committed to providing was certainly -- will certainly not be the equivalent of a full-time person in every school.

Mental health support teams, which they are looking to expand, are doing great work but they have spread far too thin, and our children and schools are crying out for more dedicated mental health time. Turning to the issue of academy schools. I fear the government is trying to fix a problem that doesn't really exist rather than focusing on the real challenges in education. My biggest concern here is that Ministers are putting the cart before the horse by writing into legislation that all schools must follow a curriculum, which we don't yet know the content of because it's under review.

In C 51 in my name would ensure we have a core common curriculum with local flexibility built in, and 52 would ensure parliamentary oversight giving know the results. On the liberal -- given that we don't know the results. On the LibDem benches we have maintained this is not a silver bullet for turning around schools, until such a time that Ofsted have settled on a new accountability and inspection regime that is swift and robust, to ensure high standards in all our schools, removing the automatic academy order for schools causing concerns, is certainly very risky.

Amendments to 23 and 25 ensure parliamentary oversight and attempt to mitigate these risks. Finally turning to home education, at Second Reading I stated that we on these benches strongly support a register of children not to ensure vulnerable children don't disappear from the system. However, we also strongly support the right of parents to choose to home educate where this is the best possible option for their child. However, when even the Association of directors of children's services was circumspect when they gave evidence at the Public Bill Committee, they were circumspect about the amount of information parents will be expected to supply as set out in clause 26, a level of detail which I would say risks becoming intrusive and unnecessary.

Ministers must think again. In C 48 calls at the very least a review on home educators to be carried out in six months to ensure that only reporting requirements quickly necessary for safeguarding purposes are retained. Amendment 224 would remove the requirement for carers and special schools to need local authority

**** Possible New Speaker ****

consent to be homeschooled. I thank the honourable member for giving way. Does she agree with me that with regard to home education that with regard to home education it's not only a case of getting the balance right between privacy and right to educate at home, it's also right to educate at home, it's also really important that home educators do not feel stigmatised with regard do not feel stigmatised with regard to the ability of the state to enter private property under perhaps means that our less than forthcoming at that our less than forthcoming at times.

And in a way that could enable the state to subsequently give an assessment of home education that is completely contrary to the reality that is experienced by the child in their own home.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think he's expressing the concerns that those of us who are on the committee found through a lot of the written evidence we received from families who home educate. Certainly in my inbox I have received from home educators in my own constituency, there is a real own constituency, there is a real fear that this legislation which is seeking to safeguard children who go seeking to safeguard children who go missing from education into over policing of home educators.

When actually most are doing a great job, and a lot of them are home educating their children not necessarily because they want to but because they feel forced to. It goes to what I was saying before, the crisis in our special needs system and the fact that so much special needs provision doesn't meet the needs of children. Therefore, you find children my parents giving up work to be able to home educate their child. And by virtue of those children's needs they tend to be much more flexible in how they are home educated, and the onerous reporting mechanisms that I think will really interfere with some of that flexibility that parents need to show to their children.

In conclusion, part two of this bill I say respectfully to Ministers is a bit of a model. The second half of it was bolted onto some well trailed measures that largely have cross- party support. I hope Ministers have heard the strength of concern from school leaders about some of the unintended consequences of their measures. And if they are really serious about helping families with the pressures they face I trust they will also listen to cross-party calls on free school meals, whether that's auto enrolment or raising the threshold for eligibility, as well as a flexible approach to managing the cost of school uniforms that I set out today.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Just before a call the next speaker, reflecting on the point about the correction online. Colleagues are here in the chamber, the corrected version in the chamber the corrected version in the chamber should read, clause 24 page 44,
15:41
15:42
Steve Witherden Portrait Steve Witherden MP (Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr, Labour)
-
-
conditions has led to the exploitation of teachers in academies and free schools. For academies and free schools. For example, teachers at ARC schools are example, teachers at ARC schools are expected to work 1657 hours more annually than a maintained school teacher, while earning 7 pounds less teacher, while earning 7 pounds less per hour. Not only does the lack of per hour. Not only does the lack of national consistency allow these schools to undervalue and overworked schools to undervalue and overworked staff, it also undermines basic rights such as pension schemes, maternity and sick pay.

Our bill will tackle these disparities by extending the statutory sick pay and conditions framework to all teachers in academies, ensuring greater consistency and fairness between academies and maintained schools. There is also the issue of admission policies. Too many schools miss use their control over admissions to break with inclusive local authority policy. Reflecting what they consider to be more favourable intake of students. The bills extension of the power to direct admissions to academies will ensure local authorities can secure places for hard to place and vulnerable students.

Rather than allowing academies to exercise shameful selective admissions. Furthermore, by ending Academy presumption the bill takes a significant step towards increasing Academy accountability. Empowering local authorities to better serve the needs of their communities. Particularly helping SEND students and reducing reliance on unaffordable independent providers. I hope to see the severe disparity between teachers pay and the high salaries of Academy CEOs reviewed and addressed in future education legislation. We must ensure that funding is directed where it is most needed, in teaching and learning.

This bill marks a historic first step towards creating an accountable and fair education system that will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

benefit all our children. It's a pleasure to take part in this debate and indeed to follow the this debate and indeed to follow the honourable gentleman, who I think has done us all a great service and the nation a great service with the clarity of his speech today. Because the party opposite is often accused
15:44
Graham Stuart Portrait Rt Hon Graham Stuart MP (Beverley and Holderness, Conservative)
-
-
the party opposite is often accused of working to serve the producer interest rather than the consumer interest, to look after the need of the trade unions and not that of the ordinary citizen or in this case the child. But rarely does any member opposite make it quite so explicit as the speech we have just heard. A total betrayal of the child, a total focus on the needs of the professional, their interests, their pay, their disparities, their conditions, nothing about the child.

Nothing about the standards of education. Never have I seen a Labour member speak up so honestly about what this bill is really about. So I think we should all be enormously grateful to him for doing that, and doing it so clearly and in not many words. This bill contains 38 policy proposals, all linked by a troubling theme. The misguided notion that the bureaucrat knows best. In advocating for new schools to be opened and controlled by local authorities, the government chooses to ignore the evidence, the innovation and competition of the thing that drives up standards.

Instead they consolidate power in the hands of bureaucrats. This bill also undermines the rights of parents to determine what is best for their children's education. Whether it be attending school or Far from empowering schools, this bill imposes a centralised outdated version of education that stifles choice and which will reverse 14 years of progress, but actually, it is more than that. It is 25 years of process, because as I referred to earlier, it was 2000 that the then Labour government announced the program.

It is 1/4 of a century of progress in which time demonstrably by every known measure of performance schools in Wales have fallen behind schools in England. Practising these appalling academy policies which have led to an improvement for the child, not understanding. The honourable gentleman has features that were quite remarkable. Things are not so quite remarkable. Things are not so tied up in trade union engagement. When the right honourable friend and members opposite served on the education office, we were aware that the policies we were helping scrutinise and influence would have an impact for decades to come on lives, so actually, in many ways it is more fundamental than the economic facilities, at least they are more easily altered.

That will be having a negative impact on them, on their families, and their community, and on this country for decades to come, and that is why it is such a bad idea. Let me give way

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to the honourable lady. Does the gentleman not agree that when a system is currently meaning that 1/3 of our children leave school without the basic qualifications to succeed in life, that there is a failure in the current system and it does need current system and it does need change, and in the communities with the most disadvantaged outside of London, the Academy approach has not London, the Academy approach has not made an impact and has not turned made an impact and has not turned the life around the children who are growing up in the most deprived wards.

I have worked. I apologise. I have worked in those communities and seen the impact of trust after trust failing those children. I will not accept that, and as the gentleman agree that it is not acceptable and we have to move forward to make increased improvements to make sure the most disadvantaged students get the opportunities they deserve?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the lady for her speech if not intervention and I certainly if not intervention and I certainly applaud her passion for the interest of children and disadvantaged children in particular. And her rage at failings in the system and her desire to see improvements made to it which might need to be radical. But we have not heard how the mechanics proposed will raise standards. They will dismantle it, and it comes into the contact of my following the gentleman talking about Wales.

And you can see the system speaks about in Wales, as so honestly said, and does the lady suggest that deprived children in Wales have better outcomes banning England? She moved to stand up then thought better of it which I think was wise of her because she knows the situation in Wales is exactly what this bill is trying to create, which is infinitely worse than it is in England. Whatever the failing, it is better than it was 15 years ago, and better than it is in Wales, but I will give way to the lady again.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Interventions should be short. The most recent conversation I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The most recent conversation I have had, not one of them raised concerns about the section and the concerns about the section and the reforms being made because for them, the question of academies a and how the amendments have been made will the amendments have been made will not limit them in their capability to the best for the children. What they are concerned about across the they are concerned about across the house are issues that will come house are issues that will come forward around sand on progress.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable lady for that intervention, but she couldn't explain anything about the bell for explain anything about the bell for improvement. But her linkage to improvement. But her linkage to anything is going to improve matters. That is distinctly missing, matters. That is distinctly missing, and so many people from United and so many people from United learning have criticised these proposals in the bill because they proposals in the bill because they said it would destroy the academy system.

I couldn't tell where the honourable lady is on that, but as I say, the lady spoke with great clarity. Where Labour promised education, now they promise bureaucracy. And tragically, it is our children who will bear the consequences, and the outcomes of the last government serve as a stark warning for where this bill will lead because in 2010, notwithstanding the Academy movement, we inherited a country where our children ranked 27th globally in reading. We spend more on education than Germany yet achieved results that lags behind nations like Poland.

By the time we left office, we were ranked in the best readers in the Western world. 68% of schools were rated good or outstanding. Today that figure is 90%, and these improvements did not happen by accident. They are the result of competition and accountability at the centre of education. And equally importantly, giving us nowhere to hide. If reforms were great, it was only because we were standing on the shoulders of giants. I quote academies were introduced in the areas of greatest challenge harnessing the drive of external sponsors and strong school leadership who give hope to our most disadvantaged areas.

Not my words but that of the longest serving Prime Minister Tony Blair in 2005. And to his credit, he recognised the failings of our countries overly centralised education system, and he started the reforms that paved the way to make us great again. For 14 years, the number of children years, the number of children attending Academy skyrocketed to 4.9 million. This was transformative for pupils across England, particularly those living in deprived communities. One example is Harris Academy Battersea, formerly Battersea Park school.

It was Battersea Park school. It was considered inadequate. That time, 68% had risen to 83%. And in 2018, Ofsted rated the Academy outstanding noting that teachers were proud to work their morale is high and pupils of all abilities made very strong progress. By putting a strong emphasis on cultural enrichment and academic excellence, the life chances of the working class pupils that they predominantly teach and who labour to represent were transformed. I am pleased that the government and congratulate the Minister has seen sense on one issue and amend the bill to stop the extension of national pay rules to academies, and only require academies to have due regard for paying documents, rather than pay.

This would have undermined the progress made by these institutions and raising standards, particularly for disadvantaged pupils. New clause 38 goes one step further for paying condition documents, extending freedoms over conditions to maintain schools. One of the strengths of academies is their ability to respond flexibly to local needs including offering competitive salaries to attract and retain the best teachers in areas and limiting this flexibility will limit teacher recruitment and retention, especially in communities with a need for high quality education is greatest.

Because people respond to incentives and if academies can't pay the best maths more than the children who would benefit from skills, they will be left behind. We introduced free schools, an initiative that helped spark a renaissance in English education, walking hand-in-hand with the union paymasters who decry the schools as unaccountable and underfunded as we had set out in the previous speech. Labour want these engines of social mobility to be destroyed. Their proposal to allow local authorities to open new schools along with a review of the programme would shift control of children's education away from communities and teachers and back into the hands of bureaucrats.

And unfortunately, the process has already started. Ministers paused plan to open 44 new state schools in England putting parents of children who plan to send their children there in limbo. So I am pleased to support the new clause which would reverse this and allow those schools to open as planned. So let's be clear that in 2024, 21% of entries from preschools achieved a grade 7 or above compared with 19% incomprehensible schools. Labour may not want to face the facts but the reality is this.

Sometimes the bureaucrat and the trade union shop steward does not know best. The Secretary of State is Labour's Miss transport, putting students in the choker to satisfy paymasters. This government is so certain in its belief that it knows best they won't even allow the parents of freedom to educate their own children without state interference. Buried within this bill is a new legal requirement to maintain a register of children not in school. A policy which I recognise was in the manifesto but which has in my view the potential not just to be unhelpful but to be not just to be unhelpful but to be harmful to children.

Our country has long upheld the privacy of parents and not the state in determining the best education for children, a fundamental covenant that this proposal seeks to undermine. That is why I do support Amendment 200 which requires a local authority to attach reasons when they don't agree for children to be home educated. They should have to account for themselves. Compulsory enrolment could have refusals to comply and to disengage because of this overreach leading to unintended consequences that could impact well-being. The state thinks it has a design right to infringe.

They want to know what children do during the holidays. If that information is not required for children to maintain schools, what is the justification for demanding it for children who are homeschooled, and why could the Minister not repeat it to provide any reassurance that we would have some sensible and proportionate rules put in place. I therefore support Amendment 197 to dispel which will remove this requirement. It was John Maynard who said when the facts change I change my mind. In the same spirit, I ask colleagues across the chamber what they do.

The evidence is clear. Freedom and flexibility does drive up standards and delivers better outcomes for children. In government, we followed the evidence and built on the previous Labour government's body of work and the results speak for themselves. England now has the best readers in the Western world, a record number of schools rated good are outstanding, and greater opportunities for working class children, albeit never at the level we would like them. As proud as I am of our record, this debate isn't of our record, this debate isn't about party politics, at about ensuring that every child regardless of their background has access to the highest quality education that we can provide so I urge the Secretary of State to follow the evidence not ideology.

I will vote against this bill but given the majority of course, we accept that however misguided these policies are, they will probably pass, so all I can do is finish by appealing to colleagues across the chamber. Show courage, stand up for the poorest in society, stop the wreckers and support our amendments this evening when we come to vote.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I would like to commend the Minister on all the excellent work Minister on all the excellent work that has taken place so far on the bill. My representations will be in relation to home education. I recognise the importance of safeguarding and making sure that vulnerable children don't for vulnerable children don't for through the net, however, the home educated community is growing, is diverse, and they are obviously passionate about children's passionate about children's Amendments 13 and 14 and my name is about amending section 7 of the
16:01
Abtisam Mohamed Portrait Abtisam Mohamed MP (Sheffield Central, Labour)
-
-
education act 1996. Without this amendment you will be left to individual local authority offices individual local authority offices to decide what is suitable education. Amendments five and seven education. Amendments five and seven in my name are about registration and the contents of the register, which would make it no longer compulsory to provide the second compulsory to provide the second parents name if it's not relevant to the child's education. If the second the child's education. If the second parents name is not mandatory then the lone parent cannot be sanctioned for failing to supply it.

The requirements for two parents names disproportionately impacts single parents who may have to make an impossible choice between provoking their ex-partner or seeing their child. Back into school. Failure to comply may result in the parent sending their child back to school which may not be best for the child, or facing fines or imprisonment. Amendments eight and 12 is about the school attendance process and would remove the use of attendance orders, where a parent is an unable or unwilling to provide information for the register.

Amendments 15 and 19 are in relation to home visits. Home visits are part of the attendance order process, and asks that there must be something about reasonable grounds on the face of the bill. A child might be anxious about strangers in their safe space at home, scrutinising how much they are learning and who have the power to send them back to school if they deem it to be insufficient. A parent may therefore feel compelled to refuse a home visit, this should not be the reason to fail their whole education, it should be added on the face of the bill that reasonable grounds may justify refusal.

It cannot be simply left guidance on a later date. It would be using a sledgehammer to crack a not if the local authority had a statutory duty whereby it must consider all the settings where the child is being educated, since they must have constantly evolving activities. Instead it says that the local authority must consider some of the settings. These amendments allow reasonable grounds for refusing home visits but would also mitigate the use of attendance orders. Under 436H and clause 7, which would otherwise have a disproportionate impact on loan parent households mostly headed by mothers.

Details of both parents required for the register under the proposed section while section 4C -- 436D applies a duty on parents to supply this information. Without these amendments include CA situation where a lone parent who is scared to supply information about an absent parent or a former partner is put at risk of reprisals from the non-resident parent whose address will also be visited as one of the homes in which the child lives. Finally, a message from many of my constituents who are home educators.

There are some who may say home educators do a good job, but And that's it. A whole community dismissed in seven words. Can we acknowledge the thousands of children my parents taking responsibility for their children's education, their work and that of their children should be appreciated and valued. We should not stigmatise home education, if adequate child protection laws fail it is that which requires scrutiny.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. It's been a very comprehensive debate about this bill. And I rise in particular in support of a number of the amendments which honourable friends amendments which honourable friends have laid to legislation today. I would like to open with a point that would like to open with a point that was debated not just yesterday but also in earlier stages of this bill. also in earlier stages of this bill. I know the Minister at the Dispatch Boxes said she regards the safety of children as the highest priority, children as the highest priority, but I have to gently say to her that the absolute refusal of the government to countenance the amendments and around equal protection demonstrates there is a lack of will to follow most other countries in implementing laws that provide that level of protection to children.

It will remain enormously disappointing and an outstanding issue in terms of child protection
16:05
David Simmonds Portrait David Simmonds MP (Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner, Conservative)
-
-
for the foreseeable future. When we consider the measures that are before the house today they are before the house today they are primarily concerned with the schools element. I have to say, I would like to back up a number of colleagues to back up a number of colleagues who have set out the long-standing cross-party nature of the measures cross-party nature of the measures which underpin the success of the education system in England today. I education system in England today. I was a governor at one of the first schools whoever became an Academy, sponsored by a significant Labour Party donor who came forward to support a conservative local authority that engaged with that program.

I would also like to pay a tribute to the work that was done by the Liberal Democrat Minister, David laws, who attended cabinet as the Minister for School Standards when the academies act that underpins everything that has driven forward those standards in a structural way were implemented under the coalition government. I was surprised to hear some of the comments made by the member for Twickenham, disowning the contribution Liberal Democrats have made also on that cross-party basis, driving up schools standards in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

England over the years. I chose my words carefully, over

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I chose my words carefully, over the last decades the Liberal Democrats were not in government. And conservatives had about seven or eight education secretaries in that eight education secretaries in that period of time, which suggests to me that the carousel and constant that the carousel and constant change over just demonstrates how little those education secretaries little those education secretaries actually valued education. The state of our school buildings, the state of the SEND system tells you all you

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of the SEND system tells you all you need to know about how much the Tories actually value education. I think it is important we pay tribute to the work David laws laid on this. I know as a key part of that coalition he shaped the legislation which then underpinned all of the action that followed by both the coalition and then Conservative education secretaries in the majority Conservative governments afterwards. We need to recognise that not only is education a priority, though driving forward is also shed one over the years by all parties.

I do have a degree of sympathy with an issue I know the government are trying to address. There has always been a legal conundrum between the fact that legislation passed in successive Education Act in this house places detailed specific legal obligations on local authorities. Both in the provision of school places in general, and in the provision of education to specific individual children to whom they go a duty. There are times when that is in conflict with the fact that Academy schools are their own admission authorities.

This is not a new thing, it's existed in respect of faith schools for many decades. It's clear that probably most of us in this house will have had a degree of casework arising from parents who are frustrated that they are having difficulties in the relationship with their child's school, and having difficulty in sorting that out. However, a number of honourable friends on this side of the house have made the point that most of the measures in this bill are not about relieving those issues that can be burdensome for families and individual children.

They are about imposing a much higher degree of control and centralised control on what goes on in the education system in England. An education that has powered ahead of the school standards we see in other parts of the UK, in particular Labour run Wales in that period of time. The outset of my journey on this was that in the nine days of that last days of that government I was on the body that as an employer provides evidence to determine pay and conditions for school teachers.

We might conjecture as members of the public, as member's of the political establishment, that it would be a light touch responsibility, that we would take a strategic interest in the workforce and give occasional advice and guidance on how that might be achieved. I was surprised to discover that we were to attend, with 17 unions, a weekly meeting with the Secretary of State, then Ed balls, then the Department of schools and families, in which those unions would provide a detailed list of expectations to Ministers about how every aspect of education policy would be micromanaged.

Those regular weekly meetings came to an end with the coalition government, I'm aware they have resumed since the election last year. We've had admissions from Ministers about how rarely they have spoken with school leaders, and how rarely they engage with those who represent the union interests. I invite the Minister to say how often she has been meeting with those school leaders. We have also seen a move to re-establish the school support staff negotiating body, which I had the privilege of chairing the employer side of.

Not only does it give a voice to the teaching unions about every aspect of education, but to support staff as well. One of the big challenges over the last Labour government was at the teaching unions hated the idea that school support staff would have that voice that went on in the classroom. It is again a cause for concern that the priorities for the new government are not to think about how we build on the progress we have made, with policies that re-established -- we established and principles we introduced, but instead how do we revert to giving control back to those with a vested interest in how much money is spent rather than those with a vested interest in the attainment of the children in all of our schools.

That's why it's particularly important we support the amendment around new clause 38. The opportunity to extend freedoms on pay and conditions to maintain schools. Something which frankly we should have done in government, but which there is now an opportunity for this government which says it regards education as a priority to do, it's incredibly important to create a genuinely level playing field. So that those maintained schools, which have of course been among the main drivers of the progress in reading and mathematics in our youngest children, which are one of the proudest achievements that have taken place in the last decade, are able to secure appropriately the highest quality of teachers.

I would be grateful to hear from the Minister, who has now confirmed I think that the unions demand that nobody should teach in a classroom without qualified teacher status, that demand will not apply in respect of university technical colleges. We know that UTC is have struggled sometimes in the landscape we have, like the Heathrow UTC in my constituency. Introducing an educational offer for a group of young people who might otherwise find it difficult to access the type of education that gives them the start in life that they need.

It's an example where there's a success, an opportunity that we would be taking forward, that we could be building on. And instead we see it being overlooked, potentially undermined by the measures in particular around the national curriculum. It's very hard to see how an aviation focused UTC, in the case of my constituency, closely connected with Heathrow airport looking at the employment opportunities, the chance to access apprenticeships, to gain technical skills, to learn about catering and retail, how that is going to be well served by saying the people who know about those things unless they have qualified teacher status would be prohibitive from carrying out that work.

So we need to make sure that we retain that element of diversity and opportunity in our education system. That diversity of provision and style which was always intended to underpin academise a is now at serious risk of being lost. So in conclusion, it's very clear that there is a need to reconcile the legal imposition on local authorities, for example of balancing the education budget at a local level because it is part of council tax, and there is yet to be a solution on how that should happen without an unacceptable impact on local residents.

They need to balance and reconcile the legal obligations on local authorities around the provision of places with lack of any legal obligation on the part of government to ensure those things are properly funded. But what remains when we returned to both the substance of this bill is even with the amendments we are seeking to pass, and they are very sound amendments, what the Minister describes as a mission is a mission without a purpose. This essentially is a shopping list of union demands.

There is no sense in this bill of how we take forward the progress we have made, of what it is we want to achieve for our disadvantaged children, what targets we might set, how we might go about that, how we might unleash that sense of aspiration that exists in so many of our communities. What other things we can be proud of when we left office? Use unemployment when we left office was half what it was under the last Labour government.

There were 4 million more people in work than there were when the last Labour government left office. Much of that is down to the brilliant progress that was made by so many of our schools in transforming education standards. This government should hang its head in shame that all it can do is come forward with a shopping list of union demands, and not for a moment put forward the needs of the children of this needs of the children of this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to support this bill in its entirety and to speak to part its entirety and to speak to part two. The previous speaker spoke about hanging heads in shame. I about hanging heads in shame. I could use my time in the scope of the bill to talk about the fact that the bill to talk about the fact that more children come to school not ready to learn, about the SEND ready to learn, about the SEND crisis, the amount of people who are not in education employment or training.

We can talk about legacy but I don't think you would want to hear that. I was a member of the Bill committee and there was a large amount of agreement about much of the bill, but also they are rightly being debated today and I'm sure that will continue. The child protection measures were broadly supported and are significant but they will make a huge difference to the lives of many children and their families. As many colleagues in the house no, in previous lives, I was a primary schoolteacher and in both those roles, the well-being of children extremely seriously, and we might be confirmed by speaking
16:17
David Baines Portrait David Baines MP (St Helens North, Labour)
-
-
because this is in the interest of speaking and what is best for them. speaking and what is best for them. With that experience, I can't welcome this bill enough and welcome this bill enough and conversations that I've had with families and school staff suggest to me that I am not alone. This bill introduces a floor not a ceiling on standards, ensuring that every classroom has a qualified teacher classroom has a qualified teacher and making sure that they all teach the curriculum which is common the curriculum which is common sense.

And despite a bit of scaremongering which was reported last month, school survey found the Academy of leaders saw little to no negative impact from the bill and from schools that I've spoken to, that is the general consensus is well. One of the measures in this bill which is getting the most bill which is getting the most attention is free back., And I have sympathy from the member for Dulwich in West Norwood making provision for children on the SEND register, and hoping this will be something that will be monitored going forwards.

The first 750 schools to pirate the scheme, they are among the first cohort. Speaking with Chris Forrest, the ambition and excitement for the school and this opportunity was clear. It is a fantastic school and I have no doubt they will take the free breakfast club. As a teacher and council leader, I often watch previous government took about education and state schools in general, and children from communities like mine as if it was something foreign. That is if they talked about us at all, so I was thrilled to have the secretary of talk about my constituency.

It is a model for us to follow and speaking with the Head Teacher and the event in my constituency on Friday, I know he is determined to take it further and will do so with our support. Every single parent is ambitious for their children. The vast majority of them are currently working to make ends meet and they will welcome changes for breakfast clubs. Not to mention the ointment bill which parties opposite continue to vote against. This bill does a lot and I will vote for it with enthusiasm, but there is still a lot more to do.

There are amendments tabled where I have a huge amount of sympathy regarding the take-up and availability of school meals. The auto enrolment suggestions are a no-brainer and I hope the government will look at that. More generally, if we will improve children's well- being, we will have to end child poverty. This will need a whole national effort, much bigger than this single bill or any other, so I look forward to the task force in due course. I am determined to use my time in this place to do all I can give every child the best possible start in life.

No child should be left behind, and if we can achieve that, voting for this bill

**** Possible New Speaker ****

is a good place to start. There are good elements in this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

There are good elements in this bill. In line with the recommendation, I agree that the recommendation, I agree that the house must make it an urgent duty to report abuse. As my honourable report abuse. As my honourable friend for Twickenham's new clause 50 sets out, we also want to see the new authority set out for enquiries new authority set out for enquiries into culture and the like. And I fully support breakfast clubs following the invention of free following the invention of free school meals a few years ago by the government.

These are good measures because they put the interest of the child at the centre of everything. And whether bill goes wrong as it puts ideology ahead of the interest in the child and loses sight of those interests. So I don't support adding taxes outside of this. I am concerned about academies as well, and every conflation of children
16:21
Gideon Amos Portrait Gideon Amos MP (Taunton and Wellington, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
being educated with safeguarding concerns isn't borne out by the evidence. It is an ideological position which is an insult to the 110,000, our constituents up and 110,000, our constituents up and down the country who are doing a great job on ensuring that children are educated when home cheated or educated otherwise. According to the local authority data published in local authority data published in academic research, only 11% of child protection quarries into home educated children result in a child protection plan.

That rises to 26%, more than double for the average child in schools, so those who are educated at home are safest and least in need of protection so it doesn't justify this overwhelming rate of legislation which seems to be tackling home education as a sector. Therefore, new clause 8 is right to remove the burdensome and highly intrusive sanctions against those families, and unless my honourable friend is passed, the bill could allow or would allow grandparents reading to their grandchildren on a regular basis to be served over notice to respond to it on paying for monetary payment he wishes to issue it.

These are extreme. Instead, we should be supporting the interest of the trial. We should be supporting children and allowing them to sit exams without charging them hundreds and hundreds of pounds. My honourable friend will do exactly that. Without that, without provision like that, I asked the government is if there is anything they can conceive on that support home educated children in this bill. There is plenty to regulate them, to control them, to expose them to rigorous inspection. There is not a single clause in the whole bell that actually supports children being educated at home, and why the Treasury cannot be persuaded to simply allow them to sit exams without paying hundreds of pounds is beyond me.

I cannot fathom why a government would not want to provide for children to sit examinations. In Somerset, we have a council which has a much better proportionate approach. We have a protocol developed in partnership with him educated families. I am worried that that approach will be swept away by some more approaches to this bill. And at worst, the prospect of children being forced back to school by a local authority officer when they might be frightened of going back to that school which cannot be right.

Let me now turn to my constituency to pay tribute to state schools like those my own school attended where I said there was a more positive coach working with schools and families and local authority. I pay tribute to the pupils at West Monkton primary school who have written to me and I completely support their bid to ban single-use plastics. And for those schools and the 5254 children with an educational health and Plan who can't get a school place, like the family who came to my surgery on Friday, could I urge the government to do more to help those families, those families of children with special educational needs.

It is crazy that the system is preventing them from attending school when they want to. We need to see more projects like the special education needs centre which I visited recently. We need to be driven by the interest of the child not by ideology. Finally, may I say that until the government addresses the fact that two out of every 3000 Council Tax in places like Somerset is going on care, and national responsibility. Local services, schools and communities will see less and less investment in the area.

That funding has to be tackled because it affects a whole programme of finance including schools, and that is not good for our environment, for jobs, or for the growth of our economy.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is a privilege to stand again

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is a privilege to stand again in support of this bill. If we are to improve our school system for the benefit of all children, regardless of their background or educational needs, then their welfare and needs, then their welfare and interests need to be at the heart of any reform. Contributions from the ventures have suggested that this is being done or that this can't be being done or that this can't be done without sacrificing standards in education. But this couldn't be further from the truth.

It is because this government are because this government are ambitious for all children that the commitment to excellence in education is the driving force behind the measures of this bill. Because Labour know that when standards in school drop, it is the working class children which may be
16:27
Sarah Smith Portrait Sarah Smith MP (Hyndburn, Labour)
-
-
working class children which may be lower on paper that have no less impressive due to overcoming additional learning challenges that additional learning challenges that will suffer. This builder picks a cultural shift in how government cultural shift in how government approaches educational reform through delivering change in the sector through partnership and child-centred policy. The prioritisation of a child's well- prioritisation of a child's well- being and a focus on inclusion are not woolly concepts but the bedrock of stability that will enable all children to thrive.

It is not contentious to say that we have a fragmented school system that is letting far too many children down and this does need to change. Children need to feel like they belong in their school and in every setting, regardless of type. They must be given the freedom to drive up standards in a way that meets the needs of their pupils and communities. And this bill goes back to the original purpose of academies which was to share best practice and encourage collaboration in the best interests of our children.

Allowing councils to open new schools to ensure that it is not just about more school places being available but that places are the ones best for local families and where they are needed, this is a very positive step forward. A focus on school structures alone will not help families, children, or teachers alike. I want to speak specifically in support of the rollout of breakfast clubs that will lead to every child having access to a healthy meal to start the day. As the impact assessments state, these clubs will help boost children's attendance, attainment, behaviour, well-being and readiness to learn.

I would like to commend my honourable friend the member of Darlington West Norwood for highlighting the need for any provision to take into consideration the needs of all children through amendment to, particularly those with disability needs. Inclusion is at the heart of this policy, and therefore adjustments will need to be made to provide the food, transport and staffing for pupils in mainstream and specialist provision. I also support new clause 1 and the auto enrolment of children for free school meals. These two amendments would support the government's mission to tackle child poverty.

Unfortunately, special schools for behind mainstream in terms of the offer to pupils outside the conventional school day. Recently, a school close to Haslingden serves many of my parents and families which has shortened the school day by a whole hour against the wishes of parents and I must say I found their reasoning quite unconvincing. It is going to cause chaos for families and it wouldn't have been tolerated in a mainstream school, so we must do better with disability schools to make sure that those children get the same school standards and provision that the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

government is working to achieve. On the point of SEND, one of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

On the point of SEND, one of the things that Head Teachers and my constituency of Carlisle report to me is that the crisis that we have me is that the crisis that we have inherited in education now means that rather than inclusion in mainstream settings, too many children with special educational needs are being offered access but needs are being offered access but no longer inclusion, and as my friend agree that we do need to get friend agree that we do need to get to grips with the SEND crisis that we have inherited from the benches

**** Possible New Speaker ****

opposite? Clearly looking forward to what

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Clearly looking forward to what will come forward with what we do to tackle and genuinely offer inclusive tackle and genuinely offer inclusive settings and make sure that the needs of every child at the centre of all decisions that we take. I of all decisions that we take. I look forward to working with colleagues and discussing with ministers how we can drive standards ministers how we can drive standards in all of our schools. The Secretary of State spoke about the sense of belonging in the classroom where a belonging in the classroom where a child knows that they have potential to achieve great things because they are valued and that their learning As Ministers know and understand, nowhere is the need for this approach greater than for those children living with educational needs and -- special educational needs and disabilities.

I would like to thank the Minister for education for his encouraging words during the committee stage on the understanding of well-being. How we could in the future chart national well-being could help embed this key data into policy-making and commissioning going forward locally and nationally, to ensure schools can further improve for young people. There is some brilliant work being undertaken on the this by the be well foundation, a widowed Ministers to engage with them on what they are learning about how that data can help and improve provision for young people.

As the Labour champion for the government's mission to breakdown barriers to opportunity, I've had the privilege of visiting many schools to reflect on this area
16:32
Adrian Ramsay Portrait Adrian Ramsay MP (Waveney Valley, Green Party)
-
-
new clause 34, and Amendment 173. New clause 34 would extend the provision of free school lunches to all primary schoolchildren. I pay all primary schoolchildren. I pay tribute to the work of the honourable member for Stroud who tabled this important amendment at tabled this important amendment at committee, with the backing of 42 honourable members. And to my honourable friend from North Herefordshire who moved the amendment in committee. To set a context for new clause 34, the children's charity Barnardo is clear that we are seeing epidemic levels of poverty amongst children in the UK.

Across the country families are facing a desperate struggle to put food on the table, keep the lights on and heat their homes. Nationally 4.3 million children are in poverty. In my constituency 3920 children are growing up in poverty, that's 21% of children. This shocking state of affairs was a political choice of the last government and those who backed austerity. We should not repeat it. The no Child left behind campaign that underpins new clause 34 is backed by over 250 civil 34 is backed by over 250 civil society leaders from unions and charities to faith leaders and mayors and councils.

This widespread backing is unsurprising, because the case for universal free school meals is overwhelming. The need for free is overwhelming. The need for free school meals is acute, during the pandemic we all remember Marcus Rashford supporting the campaign, pointing out we could fill 27 Wembley Stadium is with a 2.5 million children who were struggling to know where their next meal might come from. This shameful legacy of child poverty continues. Poverty is embedded and the University of Bristol research shows one in five schools runs a food bank.

This is, I am told, a figure even higher than the number of community food banks being operated outside of schools by Trussell and the Independent food aid network combined. The National education union explained their members see the struggles of children in poverty everyday, with 80% of children's -- teachers asked saying they have provided food for hungry children out of their own pockets. One of the members of that union says so many of our children arrived tired and hungry, I find the issue with food so awful, I start my school kitchen every week with fruit, cereal, milk, biscuits.

The number of children who pop in to see me and ask for food is grown over the last two years. It is heartbreaking. A universal approach is the best policy for three key reasons. Firstly, it's good for children. Universal provision that helps children learn and grow and thrive in school. For example, research published in November 2024 evaluating London's rollout of free school meal provisions for all children attending primary state schools found the policy helps with children's readiness to learn and ability to concentrate. The Department for Education valuation of the pilot undertaken by the last Labour government found pupils in the schools where children already received free school meals were found to have made four to eight weeks more progress in maths and English over two years.

In these pilots the children made the best progress, reducing the attainment gap. The effect on the attainment gap was negligible in means-tested areas. On the health benefits, research by the B GAA found 2% of packed lunches meet school standards. This is a major opportunity to improve healthy eating. The policy also reduces stigma and shame, giving students a better sense of belonging in schools. Means-tested provision these two children feeling singled out, impacting their enjoyment and engagement with school. Secondly, free school meals for all is an effective investment.

The evidence shows universal systems reduce inequality and deliver economic prosperity beyond the classroom. The cost benefit analysis of expanding free school meals by PricewaterhouseCoopers shows that every 1 pound invested in universal free school meals returned £1.71 generated in core benefits such as increased services in schools and increased life chances for young people. Other expert research shows the provision of universal school meals increases lifetime earnings with the biggest increase for the most disadvantaged children, reducing inequalities for a generation beyond school.

When food is sourced sustainably, work friendly food for life partnership demonstrated that over 3 pounds in economic value can be created for every 1 pound spent, mostly in the form of new jobs in the local economy. And the third reason is that universal provision is more efficient. We know that providing free school meals helps in a situation where children for through the gaps. Means testing will always mean some children and families, the Draconian criteria means one in three children living in policy are considered to well off for free school meals.

The complicated registration processes and stigma also blocks countless families from accessing support. Universal provision would end the situation where children fall through the gaps. Universal systems are also more efficient because they massively reduce registration, by putting an end to means testing for schools get back administration time as all meals would be funded in one mechanism. Free school meals for all of eradicates trouble around lunch that. It also protects from erosion from future governments who may seek to change eligibility.

Wales and London are leading the way in providing free universal healthy meals at lunchtime for every child in primary school as a means of reducing inequality. Not just in school, but for entire lifetimes. And England needs to catch up. I sincerely hope the Minister will consider building on the excellent progress on breakfast clubs contained in this bill. To conclude, this amendment makes the case for all primary schoolchildren, but I want to be clear that I my party will also support the extension of this policy to all children in school because hunger doesn't stop at the age of 11.

I aim to bring about a division in the house on this vital amendment that builds on the excellent breakfast clubs provision, I urge all honourable members to vote for new clause 34, because we know that children cannot learn when they are hungry, and that free school dinner for all is a winning policy for the economy, for families and for children. Turning briefly to amendments 173 on local authority consent for the withdrawal of certain children from school. Home education is an option that works well for many families, many children thrive in this environment.

Nevertheless, for vulnerable children there can be real dangers in dropping out of sight of public agencies. This bill rightly already mandates that if a local authority has live child protection concerns about a child, because they are suffering or are likely to suffer harm, then the parent must obtain the consent of the local authority to take their child out of school. This has previously had concerns on action 47 of the children's act 1949 in order to promote welfare. The NSPCC supported by the children's charity coalition has called for this strengthening of the bills protections to safeguard the most vulnerable children for whom withdrawing from school poses a risk to their safety and welfare.

Last year the child safeguarding practice review panel published analysis of serious case reviews, involving children who had died or suffered serious harm because of abuse and neglect. These children were not in school at the time under the proviso of receiving an education at home. Of the 41 serious case reviews, over half, 23 of the children, were previously known to children social care, including being subject to a child protection plan prior to the time of the incident. Under clause 25 as it stands children like this would not be safeguarded, which I'm sure is not the government's intention.

I therefore urge the Minister to seriously consider amendment 173 as a proportionate and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

necessary safeguarding measure. As a member of the Bill committee I have had detailed oversight of the measures this bill contains, these are vital measures for safeguarding are vital measures for safeguarding children across the country as well as supporting children and families with measures such as free breakfast
16:41
Lizzi Collinge Portrait Lizzi Collinge MP (Morecambe and Lunesdale, Labour)
-
-
with measures such as free breakfast clubs, reduced school uniform costs, and extra support for kinship carers. I am thrilled that in my constituency three schools have been chosen to pilot the free school breakfast club. This will put more money in parents pockets, and ensure all children start the day right with a healthy meal. This bill is being subject to healthy debate in this place and in committee, and it is a strong piece of legislation. One that has been strengthened through the parliamentary process.

Looking through today's order papers I was very interested to read new clause 1, brought by the honourable member for Dulwich and West Norwood, and interested in the idea of auto enrolment for free school meals. I have had parents contact me you are eligible for free school meals but found the application process quite difficult, and are getting passed between the school and the council. Auto enrolment would help these children and families get the support they are entitled to from day one. It's important that children from all backgrounds have the same opportunities in life.

And I welcome measures in the bill that aim to tackle inequalities. I have spoken previously about inequalities that arise from faith-based admissions to schools, where children are allocated school places based on the professed faith of their parents. I am pleased the government has confirmed the 50% cap on faith-based selection criteria to new academies and free schools. Faith-based schools are shown to be less diverse than comparable piers on a range of measures, including levels of deprivation, for example free school meals, the number of children with special educational needs, and diversity of race and as -- race and ethnicity competitor local areas.

It is social selection by proxy. And in my opinion selection by faith has no place in taxpayer funded schools at all. The 50% cap on faith-based selection was brought in by the previous Labour government to address this of inequality, and at least ensure some regulation of this. However I'm still concerned schools opened by local authorities are not subject to the same cap, and in cases of oversubscription could potentially allow 100% faith-based admission. I raised concerns about this directly with the Minister, and I thank her for her time discussing it with me.

I'm very pleased to see this bill takes action to tackle illegal schools, action long overdue. At least 7,000 children attend illegal settings, for obvious reasons this is an estimate. OFSTED have been raising this as a problem for many years, because they don't have sufficient numbers of entry investigation into illegal schools. This bill fixes that, granting OFSTED increased powers of entry and more powers to bring criminal cases against the schools and the people who run them. Many members may not be aware of what illegal schools are.

They tend to be concentrated in specific local authority areas. They usually run by religious groups who tend to be fundamentalist, extreme, high control, or isolationist in their outlook. We know from former members former pupils of some of these schools that in many cases they only studied religious texts, and received no other form of education. Instead of having broad and balanced education these children are subjected to indoctrination. Children attending illegal schools have also been subjected to abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse.

This is unacceptable and these settings must be regulated. If they are unwilling to be regulated and offer a proper education they must be shutdown. I refer members to the contribution made by the honourable member for North West Cambridge in last week's crime and policing Bill debate, for a flavour of the attitude that high controlled religious groups have towards reporting abuse in their communities. I also lay on record my thanks to humanist UK for their work on ending the dreadful practices of illegal schools over the last decade.

I welcome that this Labour government have recognised the severity of these problems and taken swift action to safeguard these vulnerable children. I also welcome future discussions on how to manage Another key measure is the advancement of regulation of home education. I have been contacted by some constituents who are concerned about the new regulations on home education. The vast majority of these are parents who have chosen to home educate their children due to failings within the school system, particularly for children with special educational needs.

I sent out of these parents and I have spoken before about how delays in getting care plans alongside measures to implement these mean that our children are suffering. I completely understand why some parents have decided to withdraw their children from school where needs are not being met. Unfortunately, not all parents who remove the child from school are motivated in the same way or provide a decent education. Sadly, there are too many cases where children who are classed as home educated are attending the illegal settings that I set out earlier.

Or something not receiving any education at all. In the worst-case, we have seen children removed from school to protect detection of abuse. It is only with this bill that this can be tackled. The introduction of registers for children not in school is crucial in ensuring that children don't for through the net.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

With the honourable lady except that in the case of the mentioned that in the case of the mentioned earlier, the murder happened in the earlier, the murder happened in the school holidays and that she was already known to social services, so already known to social services, so the fact is that there was not much evidence to home educate in the evidence to home educate in the first place. There is no correlation in the data between children who are home educated and children who are ultimately judged.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I would like to acknowledge the complexity of that case and the failings that Sara saw before her death were abject across many organisations and were absolutely organisations and were absolutely unacceptable. However, it is the case that she was removed from school partly so her parents could protect her from that abuse. I continue to recognise that continue to recognise that obviously, this does not speak to the vast majority of people who home the vast majority of people who home educate the children, but the fact is, we have a duty to protect the most vulnerable, and sometimes, that includes regulations of the majority who were decent, honest people.

So, I want to reassure parents that new regulations and the capacity to compel certain cases are not aimed at limiting education as a whole

**** Possible New Speaker ****

educated. The intention isn't the thing. It is the actual impact that is the is the actual impact that is the thing, and if you have taken your thing, and if you have taken your child out of school, perhaps autistic child, miserable every day, letters to the Head Teacher, local letters to the Head Teacher, local authority, failure after failure, you are forced to go into him education, to have a representative education, to have a representative of that failing authority coming in, having the right to enter the home and sit in judgement on the child and sit in judgement on the child that you have been forced to educate, could she understand why parents are fearful of this imposition, especially after so many years of offering support for home educators but happy to come forward for the hard top down register?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I accept wholeheartedly the amount of parents of children with amount of parents of children with SEND who failed by our system. Failed by 14 years of Conservative Failed by 14 years of Conservative government. Don't accept that this government. Don't accept that this is somehow a major imposition. That checking that children are receiving a decent education, checking the a decent education, checking the children are safe and well cared for, I do not believe that is a for, I do not believe that is a major imposition on parents, and I think all good parents would welcome that.

These measures are being put in place to safeguard vulnerable children having no oversight of children at school is an unacceptable risk to children's welfare. Children's welfare is crucial and can't come too soon to protect our most vulnerable children. As well as support families up and down the country with rising costs. It has the welfare of children at its heart, and I am proud to have sat on the Bill committee and to have played a role in shaping this vital legislation.

Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Like VAT and putting up costs through National Insurance contributions, this bill is yet contributions, this bill is yet another example of Labour turning another example of Labour turning children's education into an idea logical battleground. Labour clearly hates any form of education that is hates any form of education that is not state controlled schooling and this bill is another example of it. Under the Conservatives, pupils Under the Conservatives, pupils soared up league tables ensuring that every child, regardless of postcode received the best start in life.

But Labour is intent on reversing this progress, attacking freedoms and dismantling a system that has delivered demonstrable results for young people. Indeed, it was a system that Labour used to champion but now they have come back to power and they are looking to dismantle it. Most of this bill is trying to solve a problem that does not exist. Like the employment rights bill last week which was rushed through without proper scrutiny, and behind it all is the cold dead hands of the union paymasters that fund Labour.

And as I said during the employment rights bill, and we had to gain, we heard the Jurassic Park of the unions back the Jurassic Park of the unions back again, and like last week, it is not Jeff Goldblum. It is like Jeff Goldblum being savaged by the dinosaurs. It is our children. dinosaurs. It is our children.
16:53
Gregory Stafford Portrait Gregory Stafford MP (Farnham and Bordon, Conservative)
-
-
Would he accept that a member who has actually worked in schools as a teacher might have a really good

**** Possible New Speaker ****

grasp of what happens in schools? It would be totally wrong of me

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It would be totally wrong of me to make any aspersions on his teaching ability. I have not sat through a classroom, but it was through a classroom, but it was anything like the speech I sat through an hour ago, I would perhaps be looking to find some other be looking to find some other educational out at for myself or my educational out at for myself or my child. Whilst I acknowledge that some of the child protection aspects of this bill are important, much of of this bill are important, much of it represents a dangerous and unnecessary centralisation of power that will harm schools, and most importantly, pupils.

In recent meetings I have had with the last Wednesday SEND group, there has been concern regarding the proposed legislation. Many of those feel vilified for choosing to remove their children from mainstream education in favour of alternative specialised provision tailored to the individual needs of their children, and I will take this opportunity to highlight amendments that are particularly important and I do urge us to look at this consideration. The first is about the national curriculum. Clearly, a national curriculum can provide a broad education, but that is not a one size fits all system.

We strike to look at a progressive move, and it is concerning for provisions like pathway schools in my constituency. It plays an invaluable role providing informed strategies alongside high quality curriculum is. Excellent spaces like these would struggle to continue under state imposed education scriptures. New clause 41 about the curriculum, and as I said, I want to draw particular attention to this clause. This would give parents the right to ensure that children are fairly exposed to material appropriate for the age group.

I don't think it is controversial to say that parents have a unique and intimate understanding of children's needs, and it is only right they have an active role in ensuring the quality and suitability of their children's education. Moving on to home education, a key group in my constituency who have ardently imposed this is home education, a provision used for many purposes across Haslemere because it provides a more personalised approach to certain children. We don't always agree for a child to be home educated.

Families are concerned that original proposals proposed excessive state control over home education failing to recognise the dedication that parents provide, and the lady opposite in the speech just before mine said all good parents would welcome this imposition on education. That is simply deeply unfair to all the good home educating parents that have contacted me. They do not feel that this is a proportionate measure. They think it is a deep imposition and they are good home educators.

Clause 200 is a more proportionate way to address concerns while still ensuring the accountability that the honourable lady wanted. This is especially important for families with SEND children, a process that can take up to 2 years. In my local area, 70% of independent school pupils received support, but only 6% have a formal DHCP, so home education in that interim gap between receiving support is often the best option for these children. Clause 202 removes the requirement for local authorities to consent for those with educational needs.

Removing these bureaucratic herbals empowers parents to make the best decisions for their children and ensures equity in education. Clause 192 around the neglect and abuse in children relating to him education is the next clause I want to touch on. Whilst I strongly support him education as a valid choice, safeguarding must remain. However, home educating parents feel vilified by this government which treats them as they are inherently suspect rather than recognising their commitment to let children's education.

Clause 192 ensures that local authorities can withdraw from school where there are concerns about neglect or abuse. The entire house was horrified by the tragic case of Sara Sharif, but this clause is a necessary balance and proportionate response far more than the government's proposals which unfairly targeted responsible home educating parents. Instead of a sweeping punitive approach, this new clause focuses directly on those children who are genuinely at risk from ensuring they remain in a monitored environment where safeguarding concerns can be identified and addressed.

This bill is 90 logical attack on academic freedoms that will hurt the very children they claim to support. It imposes unnecessary restraints on schools, weakens choice and undermines innovation. The poorest pupils will suffer the most. Academic freedoms have driven up standards, allowing schools to tailor their curricula. Labours enforcement on a rigid National Curriculum was stifling process and limit opportunities. Then move to weaken the system will leave schools in limbo, harming the very children who need urgent intervention.

This built tears down 25 years of progress, progress that has a demonstrable impact on the children that it has educated going on to improve their outcomes, their life chances, their employment opportunities and the benefit to this country as a whole. I urge this house to reject this bill and to stand up for the best interest of our children. Let us protect parental rights, withhold freedoms, and ensure that every child has access to high-quality and access to high-quality and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Arise in support of Amendment 23 which seeks to amend our HSE to all young people aged 16 to 18 in young people aged 16 to 18 in further education, six form and apprenticeship settings. Currently apprenticeship settings. Currently RH as a is only available till 16 years old, yet young people remaining vocational training till 18. It creates a dangerous gap where
17:01
Zarah Sultana Portrait Zarah Sultana MP (Coventry South, Independent)
-
-
18. It creates a dangerous gap where thousands of young people are left without the vital education they need to stay safe and informed during crucial and vulnerable period of their lives. Government data paints a stark picture, statistics from the Office for National Statistics shows that 16 to 19- year-olds see the highest rate of domestic abuse from any age group. This is precisely the age when young people are beginning to explore intimate relationships, when they need guidance on recognising coercive control, domestic abuse and harmful behaviour.

We all know the tragic consequences of ignoring this gap. The recent case of Kyle Clifford, who murdered Carol, Louise and Hannah Hunt, after reportedly being influenced by the misogynistic views of Andrew Tate, it reminds us the toxic views can take root when young people are unable to access positive reliable education about respect. This is being explored by the new Netflix series Adolescence, which looks at the harmful ideologies particularly among young people. A series I reckon endeavour or not, it highlights a lack of proper education on relationships and self-worth can leave young people susceptible to dangerous controlling behaviour.

But Sibley, we cannot allow harmful voices to fill the vacuum that education can fill the vacuum that education can occupy. Education is life-saving, providing young people with clear lessons on consent,, -- coercive control and abuse can give them the tools to identify harmful behaviour leaves them at risk. Survivors are bravely sharing stories, illustrating the tragic cost of inaction. For a survivor who founded the make it mandatory campaign spoke powerfully about how education could have changed her life.

Experience in domestic abuse at the age of 16, she said "If I received mandatory education on coercive control insects for mightily believe I would have recognised the signs of abuse earlier and sought support before it escalated into four years of serious violence". Those are years I can never get back, she said, years when I was just a child. Other parents supported the petition and shared supported the petition and shared their heartbreak, I quote this from their Kastamonu. "My daughter ended her life in January 2022, aged just 21, because she was in a coercive controlling relationship and was abused on every level will stop the perpetrator was a boy she met at school and had known since she was 12.

" Another signatory said "I wish I had known about coercive control at 16 when I entered an abusive relationship and stayed in it for nine years, because there was no physical violence I thought it couldn't be abuse" teenagers need educating about this. These stories are not isolated about this, reports from the everyone's invited platform highlighted 142 sick from colleges in England were named in testimonies of sexual violence. This demands urgent action. This amendment has brought support, the women's and equalities committee recommended this change in 2023.

The children's Commissioner and organisations like the work, the end violence against women coalition and the sex education Forum all called for it to be extended to 16 to 18 education providers. This amendment is a matter of prevention and protection, about giving young people the tools to identify unhealthy relationships, to know where to turn to for help and foster help and understanding in their personal lives. By extending this to all young people in education until the age of 18 we can save lives, prevent harm and create a safer society for everyone.

It's not just the right thing to do, is the necessary thing to do. I urge members from across the house to support an amendment like this and also NC 34 which takes free school meals to all primary school pupils, a campaign I supported for a very long time. As well as other members on this side. It is on us to ensure no young people are left behind without the necessary education and food they need to stay safe, healthy and empowered. and empowered.
17:05
Nick Timothy Portrait Nick Timothy MP (West Suffolk, Conservative)
-
-
I must confess, I am worried about the education secretary and her future employment prospects. She may share the confusion of the public and wonder if the Prime Minister is a tax-and-spend lefty or a quango cutter, a human rights lawyer or a war leader. The education Minister seems to have missed the latest memo. The Minister for Work and Pensions says she wants for Work and Pensions says she wants to get people back to work. And for schools, the Luddites in the education department are taking a hammer to the machinery that has made English schools the best in the West.

For this bill, along with the curriculum review, a weakened OFSTED, the threats to primary schools, the end of free schools, we schools, the end of free schools, we can -- weakened discipline, it should be obvious that the objective for our school system should be higher standards. Of course, Ministers pay lip service to that Ministers pay lip service to that idea. But actions belie their words. Not just with this bill, but with the appointment of an academic to run the curriculum review who has criticised last government's criticised last government's obsession with academic achievement.

Governments put their trust in heads and teachers, parents and the philanthropists of public servants who sponsored free schools and academies. We followed what we understood from neurological science and research about how children learn. From work on cultural literacy to the knowledge that higher level skills are dependent on the mastery of lower level activity. We focused on maths mark mastery -- mastery, and traditional academic subjects, and watched pupils fly. When I compare my own education to what my children are taught today the difference is staggering.

Yet this government wants to go back to the failed policies of the past. Andy failed policies that continue to this day where standards are sadly far lower than in England, that is in Scotland and Wales. And we know why. This disastrous journey back is what the unions demand, and it's what those on the left in their hearts really want. We heard during the second reading debate Labour MPs explicitly rejecting the very concept of academies, and demand state run schools.

80% of secondary schools are now academies. And OFSTED says 87% of them are good or outstanding. Even though many were previously failing schools that were made academies to turn them around under new leadership. For this is an intervention that has been proved to work. Academy freedoms have given heads the space to make bad schools good. According to the Faroe schools index, which takes most academic achievement and socio-economic background into account, the top five state schools in England are academies.

In Hereford, Eden boys School and Eden girls leadership School and Eden girls leadership Academy. Multi-Academy trusts have seen schools far above the national average, with trusts like the Harris Federation, United learning, Star academies, Delta academies trust and arc all performing strongly. The children's Commissioner has said the government is legislating against the things that we know work in schools. Kathryn Bell bossing has called the bill catastrophic. Dan Moynahan, CEO of the Harris Federation, simply asked why are we doing this.

If you would like to intervene, he may. I want to say something about the bills damaging measures, starting with clause 42 which makes national curriculum compulsory for all academies. Today the interim report of the review has been published, just as predicted the review endorses the education secretary's demand for a curriculum that prioritises nonacademic subjects over traditional subjects like sciences angiography. The review throws into doubt the future of the Eve act, which ensures a proper focus on subjects. Teachers will lose the ability to prioritise what they teach and how, and children will get less time to learn reading, writing and numeracy skills to a good level.

Evidence shows academies such as the lawless trust already found a good balance between academic rigour and it led to an attainment to be 6.2% higher among pupils than pupils who had attended before it began. The trust has the freedom. Centralised control over the curriculum will also undermine schools ethos of character, take the example of Marina Academy in Plymouth which tailored its curriculum around the city's maritime history and relationship with the sea. We should be encouraging innovation not conformity or consistency as I hear OFSTED call it.

Clauses 41 to 46 removes flexibility over teacher qualifications, pay and conditions. Given academies freedom over how they are able to recruit staff led to impressive results. It gives training on their own ethos. Dixons Academy and can Kings leadership Academy have done similar. The government has not extended the requirement to clause 41 to recruit QTS teachers to further retention to university technical colleges, studio schools, non-maintained schools and early years provision. So why impose it on academies? I share concerns expressed earlier by the member for Harborough regarding clause 50.

This new amendment gives local authorities the power to overall head teachers and block school expansion. This would give local politicians the power to starve academies, this would cut some school budgets and would even lead to closures. Instead of letting parents decide which schools thrive, this is a return to failed command and control statism. As role numbers fall, clause 50 puts huge power into the hands of often very ideological politicians. And for those who doubt this danger, those of us who work in free school foundations know the games councils have played with planning applications refused to stop new schools opening.

A couple of months ago in this house the Prime Minister called academies a Labour achievement, he said academies are here to stay and will continue to drive up standards. That is what this bill is about. But if he really meant that I honestly wonder if he has read or understood it. The team know exact what they are doing. Their ideology blinds them to evidence and leaves them deaf to advice from those who know what they are talking about.

This is why Ministers can't admit the success of English schools in the Pimms rankings. The Minister can admit to those successes if she wishes. I'm sorry, would you like to intervene? No, apparently not. It's why when Michaela was once again ranked the best school in the country to progress the Secretary of State couldn't bring herself even to congratulate the headmistress when I invited her to do so from these ventures. It's why the education spectra Terry -- secretary adviser briefed newspapers that the headmaster was a liar, attacking her very personally as a failure and a conservative.

As Margaret Thatcher, not just the former prime Minister but a former education secretary, once said, if they attack you personally it means they haven't a single political argument left. And this is the truth. The education secretary doesn't have a single political argument for this disgraceful act of policy vandalism that she is determined to ignore those who know better than her and to push on, and the people who lose out I'm afraid will be the children from ordinary working families the length and breadth of the country.

Denied the best we can give them, unaware that a better and brighter future has been stolen from them thanks to nothing more than

**** Possible New Speaker ****

vindictive left-wing dogma. Thank you. It's an absolute

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. It's an absolute pleasure to stand here today and support this bill, which delivers on the governments mission to breakdown the governments mission to breakdown barriers to opportunity. And it is a barriers to opportunity. And it is a bill which will drive higher rising standards in school, and it will cut the cost of sending children to the cost of sending children to school for my constituents and make life easier for families in my area. life easier for families in my area.

And stop children falling through the cracks to landmark reforms to safeguarding and children social I spoke in favour of the bill in January and I am pleased that the
17:16
Steve Yemm Portrait Steve Yemm MP (Mansfield, Labour)
-
-
bill has not been substantially amended with reference to the issues that I spoke about. The first of that I spoke about. The first of those is the future profit Which will allow the Secretary of State to The profits of non-local authority OFSTED registered providers of OFSTED registered providers of children's homes, foster agencies and supported accommodation. This and supported accommodation. This bill as amended will still do this, and the second aspect of the bill and the second aspect of the bill which I particularly welcome is the introduction of free breakfast clubs in every primary school.

I know that the government added amendments six during Committee stage, but this amendment is a technical one and the bill will effectively remain the same provision. I know therefore that the breakfast club clause within the bill as amended has been warmly welcomed by constituents in Mansfield for many reasons. Not just because it will save families in my constituency up to £450 a year, but also because evidence shows that providing a healthy school breakfast can contribute to improved readiness to learn increased consultation and improved well-being.

And therefore, I am also pleased to see that we are wasting no time in rolling out our free breakfast clubs in primary schools with two schools in my constituency in Mansfield being chosen as some of the first schools to trial free breakfast clubs in the programme. They are the Church of England primary Academy in Mansfield and in Forest town, so I welcome this announcement and I was pleased to see that those schools will allow the government to monitor what works, what needs correcting before a wider rollout across England.

The government has made it clear that one of our top priorities is investing in the next generation to break down cycles of property that hold our nations back and this bill clearly drives home labours resolution to breakdown barriers to opportunity and I will be voting for it proudly on behalf of all of those children and families across the country and in Mansfield that will benefit from all of these measures.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am very grateful to be called in this debate and it has been an honour to join the bill committee
17:19
Damian Hinds Portrait Rt Hon Damian Hinds MP (East Hampshire, Conservative)
-
-
for the bill which we have considered the amendments before us, many of which I am here to talk about today with home education, and my right honourable friend made some my right honourable friend made some excellent points. It is important for us to discuss the breakfast clubs provision, giving breakfast to children. As we get closer to implement Asian, we more get mail saying that they might save £450 a child, the amount of money they will give to schools goes down as low as £114 per child, quite a gap for schools to make up.

On uniform, we saw some good debates on this. If they think these changes will automatically result in the cost of sending children to school because everyone will go down to Asda or get and branded clothing, there will be no power, no competition on sportswear, I would just say to them the next time they do a school visit, go to a PE lesson and look down at the children's feet, and if you can't make it to a PE lesson, just wait for the end of the school day and stay at the gates and look at the children's bags because it is not automatically the case that not having uniform items for sports makes it cheaper.

I also hope that in this legislation, the government will get rid of this anomaly where they say it is all right to have a they say it is all right to have a school tie as an additional item but not in a primary school for some reason. There are also important new clauses to consider, so one auto enrolment, we talked about the Minister for early years. Historically, they had barriers for free school meals, particularly around IT systems and a legal basis, and the IT systems issues are melting away as technology improves, and I hope this is something that the government will look at seriously.

But if I was to give you comments on every clause with which I have an issue or every amendment I have an opinion, I will stretch even your famed patients, so instead, I propose to take a step back and consider that what we are debating here today is more than just the 84 pages of parts two and three of this bill. It is more than the 62 pages worth of amendments. It is a debate around the soul and the direction of education in England.

And other colleagues have mentioned this already, but this new government does have a very solid base to build on in terms of attainment in England. The best primary school readers in the West. Yes, it bears repeating. At secondary school, our ratings in mathematics went from 27th to 11th and in reading from 2050 13th. The fact that children on free school meals became 50% more likely to go on to university than they had to. Those are the records of the last few years.

We went to the previous 13 when it went down. And there were standout performers. Starting of course with Sir Tony Blair with education education education, but also, they won't always swimming against the tide on the left. We shouldn't exaggerate how much was achieved by the end of the last Labour government. There were a couple of hundred academies as opposed to many thousands today. Now, what happened between 2010 and 24 wasn't all about academies, far 24 wasn't all about academies, far from it.

What it was about, it was about brilliant teachers but it was about brilliant teachers existing in an ecosystem valuing high standards and high quality, and crucially, that combination of autonomy for schools with accountability for schools with a knowledge rich curriculum and proven methods like phonics and maths mastery, and schools learning from other schools, both in the network but also crucially in Academy trusts which became the primary vehicle for school improvement. And this improvement also needed diversity and parental choice, as my friend to and parental choice, as my friend to my left rightly pointed out.

It starts with clear information, with knowing about how children are doing at schools, and for many decades in this country, this goes back way before the new labour reforms. There was a time when nobody knew that children were just being let down by schools. But we took that further, as did the Blair reforms with clear Ofsted judgements. Anybody could access judgements from those who are the ability to do so, and progress eight, we don't talk nearly enough about this.

It is so much better than the measures that we used to have, either on the raw GCSE attainment or the contextual value- added measures of the Labour years. And we knew that to have choice, you also had to have some spare capacity in the system, although the previous government, remarkably, in spite of the fact that there was no demographic need, the previous government actually cuts school places, a six-figure number. We added 1.2 million more, and yes, we welcomed and made happen the diversity of academies rules.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my right honourable friend for giving way, and he refers friend for giving way, and he refers to not only the previous government but the new Labour government before but the new Labour government before that. This he share my concern and confusion? I thought there was a consensus around academies under new consensus around academies under new Labour, advancing under previous Labour, advancing under previous governments. I thought there was a consensus on the benefit of academies that this government seems

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to be ripping up with this bill. Does he share my concern? He is right that there are many farsighted people in the Labour Party who, over the years, have Party who, over the years, have wanted to overlook things and say that we must do what is best for the children. I don't think it ever became a universal or universally accepted consensus. Up until recently, there have been groups actively organising against schools becoming academies with members of the Labour Party involved in those movements, and there certainly has always been a view and a strand, and it is perhaps a wider strand than we realised in the party.

Unless you have got control from the top three councils to individual schools being told what to do, then you have an inconsistent system. Now, we want some consistency in education, but it is not the same thing as uniformity or top-down control. But it turns out now that these ministers didn't seem to want to have that transparency and choice. They want diversity, and particularly, they seem to want to curtail the school improvement performance that has been possible through academies.

They have already stopped free schools. This bill can stop academies, not only stop them growing in size, can stop them staying the same size even if they are popular with parents, and the erosion of freedoms that we all know about, starting with the qualified teacher status requirement. It is not as if schools are going around willy-nilly recruiting people off the streets without qualifications like a card up at Tesco saying apply now to teach, no prior experience required.

Of course they aren't. But equally, for a Head Teacher who is looking out for the best thing for his or her school, of course there might be reasons why you want to bring in somebody from a profession. Or you might want to bring in somebody from the private sector, or you might want to bring in somebody from another country to help with your languages. But no, we don't trust Head Teacher to make those decisions. We have got to write something into legislation.

And the national curriculum, again, it is not like schools are going around and saying we are not going to teach children English and history, we will just make it all up. In fact, if you are an inspected school as all state schools are, you can't do that. Because you will be judged on having a broad balance curriculum, the easiest and quickest way to do that is to follow the national curriculum, but there are schools who want to innovate. They want to deviate somewhat from the national curriculum and we see no harm in that so long as they maintain having that breath and balance.

It has been said by a few colleagues that it seems to put the cart before the horse to be saying that all schools must follow the national curriculum rigidly before we have the outcomes of the review. Today, we have had a publication connected to the review but not the final report. But I think it is besides the point because whatever this review comes up with and we must wait and see, the government isn't obliged to adopt it. They could adopt something else, and even if they do, this government or subsequent government could decide to do something different and having the ability to be able to deviate somewhat gives us a sense, a safety valve against over politicisation of schools, it gives some reassurance to faith schools

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Grateful. I wonder whether he seemed him the next article in schools week talking about Ofsted's schools week talking about Ofsted's new report card system following the Labour manifesto obligation, and one of the dangers is that if my right honourable friend is right and we do see a reduction in standards, that we could actually switch off the we could actually switch off the light which allows us to see it because the reliability and validity because the reliability and validity our intention as he puts it, and does he share my concern that we must come Ofsted must ensure that it continues to put a bright and reliable light on the education system so we can see whether the politics in this bill work or not.

-- Policies.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My right honourable friend gives me two valuable opportunities, the first is the pay tribute to the great Tim learning who we don't great Tim learning who we don't often talk about in this House. We are with friends here, but very are with friends here, but very receptive thinker, and I will look up his article. The other opportunity my right honourable opportunity my right honourable friend gives me is to highlight the discrepancy you can get from things that appear to be getting better that appear to be getting better while in fact they are not.

And that's indeed what happened under that's indeed what happened under the last Labour government when in spite of us falling down the international comparisons, actually there were 11 different ways that the system managed to find, they made it look like our GCSE results are improving year after year. We don't want that to happen again, so I ask the benches opposite, there were those champions in the New were those champions in the New Labour years who made these grey reforms happen, and would want to continue in that but where are the champions today? Where are those in the modern Labour Party you are going to say no, we're not going to be bound by ideology, we are going to do what's in the best interest of the children.

I hope there will be some of those champions in the other place. To be fair, I was mildly encouraged this morning to hear on the radio the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster when questioned about the fates of this bill to be let us say it appeared to be somewhat open-minded about what might happen. To be fair, I've even been slightly encouraged by listening to the sector of state for education in recent days and weeks, so it sounded like she might be a little bit open to rowing back from some of the worst excesses of this legislation.

There is still time. There will be weeks of this legislation going through the other place. And I would just ask the government please to take that time to think very carefully about the legacy that they will be leaving and to turn those words into deeds.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Minister, ministers for coming forward today, and it's an honour to have an opportunity to an honour to have an opportunity to speak on behalf of my constituents but on behalf of my former colleagues in the teaching profession and the children's welfare bill. The quality of teaching is the single biggest driver of standards in schools, so the bill will ensure that all teachers have all working towards qualified teacher status and as a former teacher, I absolutely welcome former teacher, I absolutely welcome this.

I think it's fair to say from the chuntering I've been doing this meant that I feel very passionate meant that I feel very passionate about education. And I do find difficult listening to members opposite because I do recognise the members opposite genuinely care passionately about education. Sadly, my experience of teaching and their government was very different to the way that they describe it. And I would once again ask the Minister to recognise that she is inheriting a workforce in the education system that is absolutely at rock bottom.

I would also add however, and I would be very clear to members opposite that I absolutely at the well-being of children and the education of
17:35
Chris Vince Portrait Chris Vince MP (Harlow, Labour )
-
-
children above any politics. And children above any politics. And actually, for me when I talk about the education of young people, I don't just talk about examinations. don't just talk about examinations. I talk about what in teaching we I talk about what in teaching we describes the hidden curriculum, those life skills that are so important. And I got quite animated when I spoke in a debate on this when I spoke in a debate on this very spot a month ago about the importance of financial education.

But as I said, for me a well qualified teacher who still has a joy about education and hasn't been sapped out of him by the injured barrage of comments in the press, and I have to say a revolving door of Conservative education secretaries, however as an olive branch to the member of the East Hampshire, I would add... I was just going to say something nice about the honourable gentleman. He will allow this. And as an olive branch to the member of the East Hampshire, he was probably one of the better ones.

However, I also want to recognise that the young people going through the education system at the moment have been impacted negatively by something even worse than the Conservative government. And that is the terrible pandemic. And I think we all have to recognise the impact that that has had on the young people going to the education system now. We know they are less system now. We know they are less resilient, that as people know, it's something I'm very passionate about and will talk about in a moment, and I absolutely thank the Minister for attending my Westminster Hall debates on young carers last Thursday, and I thank all members from across the House who attended and contributed to the debate.

We know that there are more and more young people having to be young carers for their parents, for their family members and loved ones, and that's really important to take into account. We know that young carers are on average likely to miss more school than their peers, and I recognise the importance of this bill in actually recording absences of young people to ensure no young people fall through the gaps. And that includes young people who are home educated. Now on the not being too political point, I went through education, I became a teacher because Tony Blair said education, education, education.

He said being a teacher was really valuable and noble profession. I went he is noble profession. I went he is right, it is. I don't think that the former member of the Surrey Heath put it quite the same way when he said that all teachers will end up, the majority of teachers were letting down young people that they teach. And that's what I want to come onto, reform and recognise that moving away from the ideological politics of reform, sometimes reform can be good, sometimes bad.

And sometimes good reform can be bad because of the way that it's implemented. And as a former teacher I can tell you very much if you go up to a student you teach, assume that I teach all the honourable member teachers, and tell them they are not doing a very good job, it doesn't make them do a better job. And actually when you look at reform in education, is hugely important that we take education, teachers, support staff along with us. And that's something I'm afraid the last government didn't do.

So we should encourage collaboration in the best interest of children. I was told I needed to talk about amendments when in this particular debate so very briefly I will talk in support of government amendment 156 which focused on the importance of ensuring that every school, all schools are run by a fit and proper person. I think we would all agree that's obviously a no-brainer. And Several points during today, we've been transported by members on the opposite benches to a sort of nirvana of education that existed under the Tory government.

That's not the memory I had all the mainly parents or children had. I think they remember real term funding cuts, increasing class sizes, millions of days lost to industrial action with unions who are fed up with Conservative governments. 11% of children going hungry compared to the 8% OECD average, and Pisa rankings are all very well and good,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

but the scores going down not as fast as other countries. I thank him, and I think he

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him, and I think he paints a picture that I can reflect on more than the one that was painted by members opposite. I would painted by members opposite. I would just say shortly after the election in August I met with a couple of former teaching colleagues who were former teaching colleagues who were still in the profession, and they just look broken. And it was really difficult to see because these are difficult to see because these are two teachers who had been maths teachers for a long period of time teachers for a long period of time who in fact were probably two of the teachers who really inspired me when I first became a teacher to persevere, to reflect on the bad days but build and have better lessons.

And to see them so fed up and just disenfranchised with being a teacher is -- was really difficult. It will emphasise again, is really important we ensure we support teachers with mental health, and the point I was going to make to the member opposite was witty not recognise or with the House recognise that actually happy and supportive teachers lead to happy and supportive young people, and those things are really important? I those things are really important? I will finish really, but just wanted to very quickly mention government amendment 166 and 167 which talks about data protection never getting in the way of safeguarding.

I think one of my most difficult days as a teacher, and has nothing to do with the Conservative government you'll be pleased to know, was when a young person in my class came to me at the end of the lesson and said those terrible words that every teacher treads, which is only to tell you something. And honestly I explained to them as you do with any safeguarding that this can't be confidential. And despite that, she made a disclosure, I'm not going to go into obviously, and then begged me not to tell anyone.

And obviously that's not an option if you are a teacher, obviously. Or anyone in a position like that. And it was heartbreaking to see how upset she was, but obviously I reported it in the correct and proper way. Clearly safeguarding is really important and something I know all professionals take very seriously and all professionals not just in education but anyone that works with young people and clearly data protection and GBR should not get in the way or I should say quite often myths about GDP and data sharing should not get in the way of ensuring that our young people are safe in education and outside of education.

And to finish on a lighter note because I appreciate I got a little bit deep there, to the Member for Beverley was discussing Elliott the educational merits of having an ice cream I would say to him, 1/3 pie R squared age is the area or the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, and thank you to the last speaker for schooling me in maths. I'm not very good at that. I'd like to begin by expressing my I'd like to begin by expressing my strong support for the overall children's welfare and schools bill, particularly its efforts to enhance child protection and ensure better collaboration between professionals in children's social care. And I in children's social care. And I welcome measures in part two which seek to harmonise admissions and provide support for the cost of living for families, especially those from deprived backgrounds.

Parents whose children are in state funded education deserve transparency. It should have access transparency. It should have access to clear information about the child's education and be assured that schools and trust are operating fairly. And I look forward to the fairly. And I look forward to the area's not in this bill coming forward that are really going to make the difference for children, such as the child poverty strategy, the SEND review and the curriculum review. But there is one part of this bill that I believe needs to be amended, and that is the level of scrutiny unnecessary scrutiny that is being imposed on parents to choose to home educate their children.

Rather than protecting them, elements of this proposed register risks putting these families in danger. There may be clear, I support the principle of the register. Local authorities as corporate parents need to know where children are if they are not attending school. Collecting some information and the reasons for elective home education is important, not only for child protection but also so authorities can plan for the future. We know that some children who are home educated later return to school and many parents make this choice because the local education provision does not meet their child's needs.

Either temporarily or permanently. This prevents an opportunity for local authorities and multi-academy trusts to work collaboratively with those families to ensure that curricular and school offerings are inclusive of their needs. But section 436.C which governs the content and maintenance of the home education register contains provision that could have serious unintended safeguarding consequences. As orally suggested by the honourable member from Sheffield Central. Under clause 25, section 434.A, the local authority are served notice to both parents unless exceptional circumstances apply.

For instance, in cases of domestic abuse or family estrangement. Yet section 436.C under clause 26 requires the register to include the name and home address of the child, both parents names and addresses and the addresses of all places where education takes place. Crucially, there is no provision for exceptions in cases where sharing this information could put children at risk. One of my constituents whose name I will protect for obvious reasons told me since 2018, I've managed to keep my home address private from my ex-partner.

Throughout the court case I was supported to keep my address private and it was never included in any document he would have access to. This register will hand him our home address, details of my new relationship and names and addresses of my new partners parents who will support me. It will hand them the address of every activity my child attends. This proposed register essentially hands motivation, evidence, licence and opportunity to continue his coercive controlling behaviour. Currently, she goes on to say, we are safe.

I daughter is now in the home education community. She is not hidden, not missing education. But this bill will put her in danger, put me in danger, put my baby with my new partner in danger. The current provisions of this bill will not increase our safety, and I have no doubt there are hundreds of other mothers in the same position across the country. same position across the country. To address this, I meant 175, in my name, has the same safeguarding expectations in section 343 A - when there is none left to a child.

I am also concerned about the reporting on the register, other than the reference to ice cream. Section 463 subsection E goes further and requires a full list of activities and details of all individuals involved, placing a burden on families and in practical for local authorities to manage and if you break down what is being asked, it would mean they must report a neighbour who teaches the child to cook, sewing lessons, museum visits,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

or regular nature of things without home-educated families. I thank my honourable friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for the intervention. As I mentioned, many things could be considered home education and should be respected education and should be respected but vital home education provided free of charge could be driven out free of charge could be driven out of business by the scale and weight of what it would have to provide.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of what it would have to provide. I thank him for his intervention and a lot of people who do not know anything about home education will miss the fact that there is a whole community of children who are educated at home and they do spend time with their peers but they are different peers and there is a risk to organisations being driven underground or lost altogether. Under section 7 of the Education Act 1996, parents have a duty to ensure their child has suitable education, through school or otherwise and local authorities can conduct informal inquires if they believe a child is not receiving appropriate education and so this is too much.

A from the register will not help assure accountability. This is overreach. My amendment will propose a more practical solution requiring a more practical solution requiring only those with more than six hours of education are being provided to be on the register and distracts a reasonable balance and ensures key educators are identified without overwhelming families or local authorities. They are there are genuine safeguarding concerns but local authorities already have the power to intervene under section 47 of the Children Act and it was also stated that this act would have done nothing to help Sara Sharif because the local authority already decided he was not at risk.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I hope colleagues in the other place will follow up on the place will follow up on the excellent speech. If it does go excellent speech. If it does go ahead, it should start with the minimum requirements and be expanded minimum requirements and be expanded if required, rather than this spread-out position. To enforce the spread-out position. To enforce the point she makes, local authorities already have the responsibility if already have the responsibility if it appears someone is not in the right education and has all the powers required if there are concerns about welfare as for conflating welfare and education in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this way is something that irritates and upsets home educators. I thank the honourable member for the intervention and I was written the intervention and I was written to by constituent about how upset they are about these issues being conflated. People are devastated and conflated. People are devastated and distraught. Effectively, this makes distraught. Effectively, this makes them feel like they are some sort of them feel like they are some sort of pariah. I was upset to hear that.

I also want to support the amendment submitted by the honourable member for Sevenoaks which is seeking clarity that educational activities outside regular school term should not be subject to this overreach and children in home education should not be subjected to anything more than the rest of us and those children receiving education out of school should have the same rights to take public examinations as their peers and should not be based on the ability of a parent to fund this because the Treasury is saving many thousands from home education and so this support to parents in clause 53 which provides a child to set relevant examination or be fully funded.

I thank the Minister for her confirmation and as I sat here this afternoon I received a letter to say the challenges faced by some . I will pass on the thanks. I will save the rest for you. I was not going to speak about academies but I have sat here for several hours and I have received two more emails relating to them and in particular concerns about governance and although I had the challenge from those on the Conservative benches about the comments from the honourable member from Montgomeryshire about teachers, I cannot tell you how many times I'm getting complaints about the way
17:53
Vikki Slade Portrait Vikki Slade MP (Mid Dorset and North Poole, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
that staff and whistleblowers are that staff and whistleblowers are being treated. I've heard of another being treated. I've heard of another being suspended while I'm sat here today. This is not about better treatment but worse treatment and if the teachers are being treated badly the teachers are being treated badly in the sector, it impacts on children and so what is about the children and so what is about the children, not just the teachers. I support the principles of the bill support the principles of the bill but ouch the government to look at potentially harmful requirements imposed on home educated children and these are commonsense amendments which are low children to be protected without placing an undue burden on families.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise in support of this bill and the amendments which seek to increase access to free school meals. This policy would make a meals. This policy would make a world of difference to the children living in poverty in my constituency which is the most deprived constituency in the country but I want to pay tribute to the amazing to cheers in all the schools in to cheers in all the schools in Liverpool Riverside that go above and beyond every single day, not and beyond every single day, not just for children but for the parents.

Research last summer showed that nearly 1 in five households that nearly 1 in five households with children are suffering from food insecurity. This was made worse
17:54
Kim Johnson Portrait Kim Johnson MP (Liverpool Riverside, Labour)
-
-
by cruel and punitive policies like the 2-child cap on benefits. the 2-child cap on benefits. Universal school meals would go a huge way towards immediately alleviating the pressures that these alleviating the pressures that these families are facing and in the sixth families are facing and in the sixth richest country in the world, no child should go to school hungry and all children should support the to achieve their full potential. 47% of children living in my constituency children living in my constituency now live in poverty.

If these children lived in London, Scotland, Wales, they would have access to universal free school meals at primary school. However, because they live in Liverpool, many are forced to learn on an empty stomach which is indefensible and unfair and the government should take the opportunity that this bill presents to put an end to the postcode lottery and extend free school meals for all saw that no child goes hungry and is left behind. The evidence is clear - the impact of universal free school meals is life changing.

Research has found it easy is the financial burden on families and helps children to focus in class and helps to foster stronger school communities. It outstripped other policies in all these areas including breakfast clubs and means tested free school meals schemes. Pictures of my constituency told me about the devastating reality that they are facing every single day with children coming to school unable to buy lunch, concentrate, unable to buy lunch, concentrate, learn properly. No matter how bright a child as our amazing teacher is, hungry children cannot learn.

The problem is not just who qualifies for free school meals but also how many eligible children are missing out. Two 250,000 children who should be receiving free school meals are not due to a system that is inefficient, overly complex, burdensome for parents and schools alike. Families struggle with complicated registration forms, language barriers, lack of awareness, with some parents avoiding applying due to stigma or embarrassment and the income threshold, £7500, is incredibly low and has not risen for many years.

Too many families are living below the red line but ineligible to access the support that they need and this is something that desperately needs to change. Providing free school meals and guaranteeing at least one hot meal per day will ease the actual burden on struggling families by saving them approximately £500 per child per year. Studies show that fewer than 2% of packed lunches meet school food standards and a hot school meal ensures children receive the nutrition that they need to work, concentrate, succeed.

Research work, concentrate, succeed. Research has shown that welfare children form perform better academically and children from non-fight communities are single-parent households are disproportionately represented despite being in total. Universal free school meals are proven to tackle health and educational inequalities, providing long-term boost to economic productivity and alleviating pressures on the health care system. If we choose to spend the money to roll school meals to all children and primary schools then for every 1 pound we spent we would generate 1.71 in benefits.

We must put an end to the economic models of arbitrary fiscal rules and recognise that evidence shows that investing in the future of our children is a sensible financial choice, as well as adjust choice. , skyrocketing inequality, and the lasting effects of the pandemic, now is the time for bold action and if this government is truly committed to raising the healthiest generation of children ever then we must start by finding universal, nutritious free school meals for all. We have an opportunity to enter the scandal of child hunger in our schools and give every child the provision that they need to thrive.

I call on the government to act today so no child in the country is left behind are left hungry. See, I rise today in support of this amendment. Especially, I would like to talk to clauses 27 and 43 and clause number one, as proposed by the chair of the Education Select Committee. I would like to agree with my honourable friend about my truth of education being far different from the experiences and views I hear represented on the benches.

I must
18:00
Jodie Gosling Portrait Jodie Gosling MP (Nuneaton, Labour)
-
-
refer to my register of interest and my partner's. In a previous life, I raised a motion at the committee raised a motion at the committee cancel to tackle knife crime -- cancel to tackle knife crime -- local council to tackle knife crime. 17 shops had been found in one 17 shops had been found in one school. -- sharps. This led to skill bonuses, large men in suits and bonuses, large men in suits and ties, stripping through bags. -- school bouncers.

I appreciate knives and schools require strong measures but what baffled me was there was no police involvement, no oversight, no accountability for school authorities. At that time, the school involved was also the one with one of the highest exclusion rates of persistent absenteeism in the country and it is not hard to understand the link. A friend of understand the link. A friend of mine, a girl that I will call Rosie for the purposes of the speech, attended the school and was thriving, attending regularly and getting on well.

She was threatened getting on well. She was threatened by a classmate with one of these sharps and the culprit was put back in the same class after three days of exclusion but there was no accountability and no change from this. How can a child be expected to focus on learning when they are scared for their own safety? We teach children of two years of age to listen for their safety. When Rosie became too anxious to attend school, things escalated.

Finally, supportive man was put in place by the school after an attempted ticket only. There were threats of fines and penalties to her mother. It Rosie did not engage with the school's plan. Her mother was forced into an impossible choice between potentially putting her daughter in harm paying a fine she could not One day we did manage to get crazy in the school, bribed, maybe even coerced, supported her in the school and an hour later she arrived at home in a taxi because she had a minor uniform violation.

She did not go back to that setting. As a teacher with 20 years at the chalk face, I welcome any of the movements to improve attendance in our schools, but there are better ways than fines and penalties, and in the case where 14-year-old girl would rather die than attend her school, there are other issues that need to be addressed. The positive impacts of good attendance in our schools have drastic and lifelong implications, and should provide support for children facing challenges but our schools first have to be safe.

They need to be solutions not part of the problem. And I welcome the phrase when it is in their best interest. And I hope in deciding... I hope in deciding their families that their voices are heard. Many decide that the children are not in education and remain at home like Rosie. A considerable number of my home educated families tell me is because the schools cannot meet the needs. I would also like to speak to new clause 1 around the auto enrolment for school meals, and this isn't just about food.

Although healthy food is incredibly important when areas like Camp Hill with over 40% of children living in poverty, access to free school meals funding is a gateway to other support. Uniform grants holiday hunger but crucially it provides additional funding for schools to provide pupil premium activities. And disadvantaged children in Nuneaton is twice as likely to not achieve national averages in English and maths by the age of 11 as a child not facing similar disadvantages. Pupil premium funded is designed to be used to not only provide specific interventions but also to give these children access to the capital culture they cannot to the capital culture they cannot afford.

Apologies. In my constituency, there are schools that have not been rated good or better by OFSTED in over a decade. I don't judge schools by OFSTED judgements alone, but a 50% or less pass rate in English and maths alone is a damning indictment when 50% of pupils do not achieve the basic requirements that they need to enter into further education. But a generation of children delivered to the world of work under skilled and underpaid, and this bill I believe. The turnaround those journeys to protect and uplift education for the children in my constituency.

This bill will strengthen the role of families and educator and child protection teams, improve information sharing between partners. This bill will provide cheaper more accessible school uniforms and require academies to make provisions for improving behavioural standards so that situations like the one previously explained should never happen again. It should provide safer learning spaces that have the ability to step in early when situations are failing to meet our high expectations. This bill has the potential to transform the educational offer in Nuneaton and truly give our children their

**** Possible New Speaker ****

futures back. I rise to speak to new clause 6 in the name of children's food champion my honourable friend from champion my honourable friend from Washington and Gateshead South in amendments 2012 to 2020 in my name. I also want to put on record my support for my honourable friend's support for my honourable friend's new clause 1 and the honourable new clause 1 and the honourable member for tweaking is new clause 7, my honourable friend's new clause 49, and it will come as no surprise 49, and it will come as no surprise that I'm also a fan of new clause 34.

Yes thanks to the last government, over 4 million children are in poverty. And I will always support anything that makes their little lives and that of their families more bearable. My honourable friend from Washington and Gateshead South's new clause would introduce a much needed national monitoring system for school food. Of course school food standards really exist, but not all schools are meeting the standards. There is far too much variance. There are some brilliant examples of hot healthy nutritious meals that fuelled children for the rest of the school day.

And then the other examples where unhealthy fizzy drinks and fried food are the norm. 60% of secondary schools have been found to not follow the school standards at all. A study from impact on urban health shows that there are significant differences between what is mandated by the school standards, what happens on menus and what actually ends up on plates. There is far too much free rein. There is no mechanism for school food standards to be checked against what pupils are being served.

My honourable friend's new clause would end the postcode lottery of school food so that standards no longer just exist on paper but also on our children's plates. The amendments in my name all relate to strengthening school breakfast club provision. After years of pushing my school breakfast bill, there was no one happier than me when the Labour government legislated the school breakfasts. And it is great to see that three of those pilots are in schools in my constituency. 2.7 million children live in food insecure households.

The previous government's national school breakfast program is missing 86% of these children. Most of them will have arrived at school ready to learn but with a known hunger in their stomachs. It is marked with a persistent worry that comes with hunger. I worry that will permeate their entire school day. This has a significant impact on their learning because hungry children do not learn. No matter how bright and determined they are and no matter how amazing or dedicated their teachers are.

Numerous studies have shown the links between nutrition and cognitive development. Hungry children suffer developmental impairments, language delays and delayed motor skills. Not to mention the psychological and emotional impact which can range from withdrawn and oppressive behaviours to irritable and aggressive ones. I've always believed in the transformational power of education. It certainly not standard for children from my background to end up in this place so the power of a good education can never be underestimated. And the food that feels that ability to learn and develop should never be understated.

These clubs will ensure that socio- economic status is less of a deciding factor in good educational outcomes, and will help realise the full potential of our breakfast clubs if my amendments are adopted. There exists no provision in the bill to monitor or measure the success of school breakfast provision. It is difficult to scrutinise the efficacy of any policy if there is never any analysis of it. Pupil premium, free school meals eligibility and deprivation index are very good indicators of the children who will need these clubs the most.

So any policy should be measured by its impact on these groups. So we know that those who are most in need are also benefiting. And more worryingly, without proper data to prove the success of the policy, a future government may decide to scrap it altogether. That is why amendment 2 12 is so important. Not all staff are nutritional experts, and some will have never delivered school breakfast provision before. So it's right that they have on hand the right advice. And why a more mixed model and flexible approach is needed from the government.

Amendments to 13, 216, 217 and 218 would achieve this. The flexibility shown in the models adopted by magic breakfast has resulted in a take-up of 375% more than in non-magic breakfast schools. Yet this bill requires that only one model, the traditional breakfast club is delivered. That is one held in a canteen for 30 minutes before the start of the school day. At the moment, many schools already use different models of breakfast clubs. Ones that suit particular schools such as classroom breakfasts, grab and go takeaway models, nurture groups and lay provision.

A rigid model of delivery will have less success, and schools who cannot fit that model will feel they have to be exempt from delivery. Amendments 2014 and 2015 would ensure that if the school did seek exemption from the government school clubs, other models have been considered. I know the Minister knows that when it comes to SEND schools, they often cater for pupils from primary and secondary on the same site. This means that in those schools, some children will be excluded from school breakfast clubs.

I know from discussions with dedicated teachers and school staff in my own constituency that they will not allow their pupils to be disadvantaged in this way. So it's likely there will use their already tight budgets to make sure older pupils also get that nutritious healthy start to their school day. Adopting to 19 but only apply approximately to 100,000 pupils in England. That is a modest 2.22 increase in the policy if all of those children took this offer up.

And we know that's unlikely because
18:12
18:13
Neil O'Brien Portrait Neil O'Brien MP (Harborough, Oadby and Wigston, Conservative)
-
-
committee. I will pick out only a few of the contributions we had, positive words from the chair of the Select Committee who pointed out how quickly this bill had been prepared and pushed through. That's why we've got so many amendments today at report stage. It is also to be honest with you, one reason why this bill has run into such trouble. My honourable friend is from Beverley and Holderness gave a great speech during his experience as the chair of the Select Committee and the honourable member the Sheffield Central given excellent speech, really laying out why the provisions on homeschooling our an excessive burden and do go too far.

We all agree about making sure that people are just not in school but the provisions really are overly burdensome, and the members from Taunton and Wellington, Mid Dorset and North Poole, North Paul and lots of Conservative colleagues pointed at the same thing. My jaw hit the floor when I first read the bill and saw the provisions which treat the parents of people in special schools the same as people who are being investigated by social services. These people are not criminals, not doing the wrong thing, and I hope the government will think again.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful, and I agree with him on the point about special schools. Additionally, in January, at Public Bill Committee, he raised at Public Bill Committee, he raised the point about local authority considering some children to be withdrawn from school and made the withdrawn from school and made the point that it should be extended from children who are subject to a child protection plan to children child protection plan to children who are regarded as a child in need. Why is the opposition not moving that to a vote today?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that to a vote today? We only have a limited number of things we can move to a vote but I hope as we go to the debate on the other place, I think we are in other place, I think we are in complete agreement on the excessive nature of some of these requirements nature of some of these requirements that are being put on homeschoolers. But we must not treat as illegitimate just because they choose to educate the children a certain way. My honourable friend from RISE lip, because on a rather from RISE lip, because on a rather bleak journey using his usual experience from the early Blair experience from the early Blair years and their reforming agenda to the regress we see now, my the regress we see now, my honourable friend explained why was such a mistake and take us through the bill in bleak detail.

I don't whizz agree with the honourable member from Coventry South, but I do on Andrew Tate who I regard as totally abhorrent, and I'm glad that my honourable friend the shadow justice secretary is leading the charge to get the tapes deported to this country so they can face justice here. I find their work My brilliant friend from West Suffolk contrasted reforming rhetoric with the rather retro agenda in DfE and my honourable friend from east Hampshire has done so much work during the bill and gave a brilliant and witty speech and talked about Labour reform and swimming against the tide and I think that is right.

He also talked about the numbers for free school breakfasts used by the government and claimed it would save parents £450. It is a mysterious figure because to give that to every single child, that would cost north of £2 billion by the government spending £33 million and so that is two orders of magnitude apart. Why not publish the workings behind the figure? I think in truth it is because the source is the back of a cigarette packet, if I am honest with you.

The honourable member for Harlow, I agree with them about the importance of teaching. It is one of the most noble things you can do with your life and all of us who do school visits, you have highly energetic chats with children in year six and realise the energy required to keep that up so I pay tribute to those who do this noble work. One of the most interesting speeches was the one from the Member for Montgomeryshire. The members opposite said that under the last government, things would not live on and people said that there was more things to fix and that is right and we agree with that.

The honourable member said things were better in Wales because they avoided the agenda of the Tory Blair era and getting rid of things like the league tables. Under the last government in England, England went from 11th to ninth on science, 27th to first en masse, huge increase. In Wales, they went from 29th, to 27. Flat at 28 on reading and collapsed to 29th from 21st on science. A pretty dismal record, really. I would encourage those who say things are brilliant in Wales to reach the ceiling -- searing report from the Institute For Fiscal Studies who said that, " PETA Scores declined by about 20 points in Wales and this brought schools in Wales to the lowest ever level, significantly below the average for OECD countries and below the rest of the UK.

Low scores in Wales cannot be explained by poverty because the children score 30 points higher on average than disadvantaged children in Wales. The performance of disadvantaged children in England as above are similar to the average for all children in Wales. Disadvantaged children in England do better than all children in Wales and the It is not ethnicity, deprivation, but more likely to reflect long- standing differences in policy and approach such as lower levels of accountability and less use of data." That is the damning indictment of the IFF.

Facts are stubborn things and we have seen what this agenda does in Wales and those who are most deprived of the ones who lose out the most. That is why this afternoon we will push amendments to protect Academy freedom and protect the ability of good skills to grow and to protect parental choice. This bill shifts power from parents to politicians and we will resist it and move to vote no to stop the destructive agenda which has failed in Wales and will fail in England, too.
18:20
Catherine McKinnell Portrait Catherine McKinnell MP, Minister of State (Education) (Newcastle upon Tyne North, Labour)
-
-
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Thank you to all the members who have contributed today, some of which have been incredibly well considered. And very powerful in their delivery but others less so. The mission of this government is to break down barriers to opportunity by driving high and rising standards and that has to be the right of every child, delivered through excellent teaching and leadership, high quality curriculum, and a system that removes barriers to learning that hold back too many children, underpinned by strong and clear accountability and the bill delivers the legislative elements of this broad and wider vision that we are determined to deliver.

As part of that from next term, free breakfast clubs will start to roll breakfast clubs will start to roll out and an early adopter skills across the country including special schools alternative settings, so honourable members and forwards amendments two, 219, 220, will not be able to say the new breakfast clubs are not accessible. All children including those with SEND and special tools are in the existing drafting of the clause. Ensuring we get this right is why we are testing and learning.

On the amendments 215, 217, 200 net income is important to be clear on the distinction between food-only outcomes being the only option. The club is as important as breakfast and will secure behaviour and attendance and saw the right approach is to legislate to give skills certainty of the minimum they have to provide to work with early adopters to see how skills can maximise attendance at these clubs maximise attendance at these clubs and to promote offers might undermine the club.

The legacy we've inherited from the previous government is shameful. Compared to when the Labour Party left office, 700,000 more children are growing up with their lives and life chances scarred by poverty. Children cannot achieve and thrive if the stresses and strains of growing up in poverty and seeing their parents worry about putting food on the table and concern for younger children and if they are friends will judge them for not having the basics are put onto their shoulders. My honourable friend share the concern of the government for these children and their futures and we set up the Child Poverty Task Was chaired by the Education Secretary and Work and Pensions Secretary to look at how we tackle the impact of poverty on the lives of children.

They support the government provides through the school food programs to enable families to access healthy food is to be considered as part of this work and it is right that these considerable reforms like extending school meals to all primary pupils are considered through this route in a very holistic way. Alongside the work of the task force, we are now making progress to make it easier for families to access entitlements and I recognise the concern that honourable and right honourable members have four children missing out.

The government is pressing ahead with making it quicker and easier for families and local authorities to get children signed up for free school meals with the new eligibility checking system which allows parents to check their own eligibility and supported local effort that we have to ensure that children receive the support. I can confirm our officials are working with the Government Digital Service and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology to explore options and what we can do to get more families signed up for entitlements.

We expect to have these in place for next year, well ahead of the academic year beginning in September, 2026. Officials are working with you the Department For Work And Pensions on Universal Credit and will engage with local authorities to assess the impact of the changes on the uptake of free school meals that I will be happy to be house on this work and wrote to my honourable friend, the Chair of the Select Committee.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Minister for giving way. She has said that the government commitment to increasing the take-up of free school meals for children already eligible and a children already eligible and a number of practical measures the government is taking to make the registration easier. This is on the basis of what she has said today, I basis of what she has said today, I am content not to push my amendment am content not to push my amendment on this issue to a vote today about I would say to the Minister that the I would say to the Minister that the Select Committee will continue to monitor the take-up of free school monitor the take-up of free school meals very closely indeed and should there be a lack of the progress that the Minister expect to see, we will come back and push the issue of auto enrolment with her and expect she

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will look at it again. I thank my honourable friend for her diligence in her role as the chairperson of the Select Committee. We want to see children receiving We want to see children receiving the entitlements to which will the entitlements to which will change and transform life chances and we will work closely with her and we will work closely with her committee in ensuring that we are communicating well with the House on communicating well with the House on these very important issues but our determination to deliver better life chances for children does not stop there.

As well as free breakfast clubs, we are looking at the holiday activities food program to identify disadvantaged children and those identified by local authorities to access healthy food and enriching activities in the school holidays also and this activity will see us go further and see what every child in children with SEND to achieve thrive and put money back in the pockets of their parents. Another part of the picture is a sad increase in childhood obesity which is something that the party opposite unfortunately did little to address.

We must ensure the food children have at school is healthy, balanced, embeds healthy eating habits and we must ensure compliance with food standards and with reference to the new clause 6 and we are working with the Food Standards Agency to take forward the findings of the compliance pilot to tackle the barriers that have been identified and I confirm with regard to clause 54 that the government will continue to publish comprehensive data and on the Food Program to ensure we have the best available evidence.

Tackling child poverty is an urgent imperative for this government and for our society and it was beyond the provision of food are putting money back in the pockets of families and giving them choice and agency in ensuring they are children are set up for the future. The action to cut the cost of school uniform is another part of that picture and taking steps to cut the cost for families and putting money back in their pockets and they know honourable members share the desire to reduce the cost of sending children to school but a monetary cap would increase burdens and could create financial penalties for schools.

It could mean having to schools. It could mean having to review uniform policies annually to ensure branded items are in the cost cap and could mean schools changing uniforms more frequently to remain within the cap and they would have to review and possibly renegotiate contracts with suppliers more frequently. For parents, more frequent changes of uniform could increase the overall number of branded items that they have to buy while their child is at school and affect ability to pass them down as a second-hand uniform and could increase reliance on specific suppliers.

Our proposals provide clarity and certainty for skills and enables parents to have greater choice about where they buy from. I meant 191 risks undermining this choice but nothing prevents from providing branded items for less cost than generic alternatives and offering them as optional items. The offering them as optional items. The amendment means all school where attracts a zero rate of VAT. -- wear. On the point raised by the Member for Twickenham, we encourage schools to use a stone on badge with the school logo but we want to give parents clarity on the limit that has been said and what that means for them and that is why we included those within the limit of three items for secondary education.

I now turn to amendments 14, 15, 16 and I commend my honourable friend's intention to provide clarity but it is important that there is consistency across local authorities and how they approach this and the MMS are not needed and section 7 of the education act is clear education must be suitable to the age, ability, attitude and special educational needs of a child and I want to reassure members we will provide guidance for local authorities in terms of everything they have to consider as part of section 7 when making decisions on the suitability of education.

Amendments eight and 12, in terms of providing information for registers, local authorities will have sight of this cohort of children including those who are home-educated and ensure they are receiving suitable education and I say. Removing the sanction from local authorities would make the provision less effective. Members will understand it is considered practised by this government and predecessors to impose a legal duty or individuals without any sanction or consequence for failing to comply. 203, concerning the application of standards to academies, academies are dependent skills in law and regulated by the Independent School Standards unless they are exempt and so taking the standards away would mean we could not hold them to account in critical areas like safeguarding and members opposite should be familiar with this regime as they operated for 14 years.

Successive governments have operated the regulatory regime on this basis and this government will do the It's more than 20 years since the last Labour government began converting schools which were failing children and showing no signs of turning around into academies. Our party is the proud parent of academies, of turning around life chances for children in communities up and down our country. The Labour government was driven by a simple principle which drives this Labour government too. Our children, all of them in every school deserve the very best education we can provide and anything that stands in the way of that must be tackled.

Parents deserve to know that their child wherever they live will be able to attend a good local school with a qualified teacher in front of the class, attracted and retained through strong terms and conditions, teaching a cutting-edge curriculum. Every child, a school that gives them the very best education that our country can offer. Academies were, are and continue to be at the heart of that endeavour. In the nearly 9 months since the election, more than 420 schools have been turned into academies.

We are working with them to drive outcomes for our children. And it's the best academies innovations and teaching and practice that we want to harness and to spread throughout our school system. Underpinned by a core of standards that no one can slip below. Take our reforms to teaching. We are committed to ensuring that new teachers are set up for a successful teaching career through high-quality teacher training and induction. Amendment 2 22 is unnecessary because there are existing exemptions which allow schools the flexibility to recruit an unqualified subject expert and then support them to gain Q TS through an employment-based route or ensure they are under qualified supervision.

Amendments to nine, two to three, two to five... Did the honourable lady honestly say at top costs a lot of money to trained teachers? That's what I understood her to say. As set out in committee we are appealing to broaden the secretary of state's flexible tea to take the best course of action for any school in the category of concern. We set out our plans for existing exercising the flexibility and the government will update the House on the progress following the consultation.

Academies Asian should remain the default position for schools in special measures, and we also propose to continue to academies schools as we build the capacity of the new RISE Mac service. September 26, we are not content to leave schools struggling as the previous school did. Schools requiring significant improvement will be supported by RISE teams. They will work with responsible bodies, trifles Grand Prix with academies Asian. The clause provides a route for independent route where the plans of the school can be reached locally.

So parents will have the opportunity to send their child to a school but they can achieve and thrive. There's been a long-standing expectation that schools and local authorities should work together on place planning. However, where authorities have unilaterally said they plan a doesn't work in the interests of children in the local area, doesn't meet local needs, setting pans that damage the quality of education children receive, this will change that. I can reassure him that it won't prevent schools from growing.

We expect there will be more places where there is demand and where they have capacity to do so. Our proposals give local authorities powers to set schools pans and will only be able to object to the independent impartial adjudicator when the adjudicator concludes that a pan is unlawful. Having regard to admissions law. School performance and parental choice will continue to be a key consideration throughout the regulations and we need to ensure that all published admission numbers are right for schools and for local children.

Finally, in relation to the monitoring and evaluation of the bill, before you set out our intention to conduct and publish a post imitation review impact assessment and will consider other post imitation reviews as necessary as we do with all measures there regulate business activities. So the bill represents just the first legislative step of what this government wants to achieve in driving up outcomes for children, and we mean every child. The security of a safe loving home, the security that comes with families knowing sending their children to school will not cost the earth, the security of a good local school with qualified teachers supporting every child to achieve and thrive after 14 years, it's not too much to ask.

And

**** Possible New Speaker ****

it's what this bill will deliver. The question is that new clause 17 be read a second time. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." The ayes have it, the ayes have it. The question is that new clause 17 be added to the bill. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." The ayes have it, the ayes "No." The ayes have it, the ayes have it.

I think I heard a withdrawal but I need to check for withdrawal but I need to check for clarity. New clause 1 has been selected for separate decision. I call Helen Hayes to move new clause one formally, not moved. New clause 7 has been selected for separate decision. I called Munira Wilson to move new clause 7 formally.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Move formally. Registration of children for free score meals. The questions the new clause 7 be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The questions the new clause 7 be read a second time. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." Division! Clear the
18:37
None Portrait Division
-

The The question The question is The question is as The question is as on The question is as on the The question is as on the order paper. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." Tellers for the ayes Tessa and Susan, tellers for the noes

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, Order, order. Order, order. Order, order. The Order, order. The ayes Order, order. The ayes to Order, order. The ayes to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order. The ayes to the right, 77. The noes to the left, right, 77. The noes to the left,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

right, 77. The noes to the left, 313. The ayes to the right, 77. The noes to the left, 313. Unlock. The noes to the left, 313. Unlock. The North have it. Clause 34 has been selected for a separate

**** Possible New Speaker ****

decision. -- noes. Move formally. The Move formally. The revision of free school lunches to all primary free school lunches to all primary school children. The question is that clause 34 be read a second that clause 34 be read a second time. As many as to that opinion time. As many as to that opinion say, "Aye." To the contrary, say,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The The question The question is The question is as The question is as on The question is as on the The question is as on the order

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is as on the order paper. As many to that opinion say,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lock Lock the Lock the doors.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order Order order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order order. The ayes to the right, 77. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

noes to the left, 350. The ayes to the right were 77.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right were 77. The noes to the left are 315. The noes have it, the noes have it. En noes have it, the noes have it. En bloc. With the leaf of the House, I shall put a single question on government amendments 132, 133 to 35, 20 to 31, 136 to 138, 32, 139, 35, 20 to 31, 136 to 138, 32, 139, 33, 140, 34 to 69, 141, 70 to 78, 142 to 144, 79 to 81, 145 to 148, 82, 149, 83 to 89, 150, 90, 151 to 82, 149, 83 to 89, 150, 90, 151 to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

153, 91, 92, and 154 to 168. I called the Minister to move all those amendments formally. Formally moved.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Formally moved.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is, here we go, government amendments 132, 133 to government amendments 132, 133 to 135, 121, 136 to 138, 32, 139, 33, 135, 121, 136 to 138, 32, 139, 33, 140, 34 to 69, 141, 72 34 to 69, 140, 34 to 69, 141, 72 34 to 69, 141, 7278, 142 to 144, 79 to 81, 145 141, 7278, 142 to 144, 79 to 81, 145 to 148, 82, 149, 83 to 89, 150, 90, 151, 253, 91, 92, and 154 to 168 be made.

As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." The ayes have it, the ayes have it. I didn't want to read those out again. Amendment 2 09 has been selected for a separate decision. I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

called Laura Trott to move the amendment formally. Move formally.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that amendment 2 hundred nine be made. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." Division. Clear the The The question The question is The question is as The question is as on The question is as on the The question is as on the order paper. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." Tellers for the ayes are Nick Timothy and Andrew Snowden, tellers for the noes are Christian Wakeford Lock the Lock the doors.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, Order, order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order. The Order, order. The ayes Order, order. The ayes to Order, order. The ayes to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order. The ayes to the right, 107. The noes to the left,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

324. The ayes to the right, 107. The noes to the left, 324. The noes have it, the noes Harvard. Unlock. I call Laura Trott to move formally. The question is that amendment 210 made. As many of that opinion, say, "Aye." To the contrary, say, "No." To the contrary, say, "No." The The question The question is The question is as The question is as on The question is as on the The question is as on the order paper.

As many of that opinion, say,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, Order, order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The The ayes The ayes to The ayes to the The ayes to the right, The ayes to the right, 167.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right, 167. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right, 167. The noes to the left, 324. The ayes to the right, 167. The noes to the left, 324. The North -- The noes have it. The noes have it. Unlock. With the leave of the House, amendments 169, 170, 93-110. I call on the Minister to move formally. The question is that amendments 169, 170, 93-hundred and 10 be made. As many as of that opinion say, "Aye." To the contrary, say, "No." The ayes have it.

The ayes have it.
19:29
Bridget Phillipson Portrait Rt Hon Bridget Phillipson MP, The Secretary of State for Education (Houghton and Sunderland South, Labour)
-
-
I beg to move this bill be read at 13. This legislation belongs to children. The clue is in the name. It is for children. It is because this government is for them. We are on a mission to break down barriers to opportunity for each and every child and sever the link between background and success. This bill sits at the centre of that mission. I start by thanking members from across the House for contributions and especially members of the Bill Committee for scrutiny.

Particular thank you to my honourable friend the ministerial team with the Member for Newcastle North and Portsmouth South for getting the bill through the early stages. The debate is valuable. Bringing education back to the forefront of national life of children at the centre of the national conversation. Every child in the country deserve safe childhood and excellent education. The action in the bill cements in legislation the biggest reform of children's social care in a generation, keeping children with their families we never seek to do so and supporting them to stay together and strengthening kinship care so vulnerable children can live with people that they know and trust when they cannot continue to live with the appearance.

Fixing the broken care market so that when children cannot steer with family, when kinship foster care is not an option, children have somewhere to live that is safe, secure, supportive. After 14 years of inaction and the most vulnerable children push to the sideline with voices on herd, the bill puts life chances front and centre and we started the reform already, piloting new financial support for kinship carers, investing over hundred million pounds on family help and child protection in the next This is a bill that protects children, based on data, evidence and expertise.

Laying the groundwork for a single unique identifier for children. Enabling sharing of the right information at the right time, creating multiagency child protection teams and requiring permission before children subject to child protection inquiries or plans can be home educated. To spot early warning signs and to stop vulnerable children falling through the cracks. It starts with safety, and builds from there. The bill legislates for free access clubs and primary schools. Our children ready to learn at the start of the school day.

Money back in parents pockets, breakfast club saving up to £450 a year, annual limit on expensive branded uniforms, saving some parents over £50 per child as part of the back-to-school shop. Because this is a government that supports families, parents and children alike. It is the right of every child to have every opportunity to succeed, and it's the right of every parent to send their child to a great local school. And that's what this bill would do. The certainty of an accident local school every child.

Our best schools in trust, our partners and leaders, they've shown the value of collaboration, how excellence and innovation can flow from one classroom to another. It's time to bring that to the whole country. Excellence in every classroom, every science lab, every art studio, every music room in every type of school. And the Curriculum and Assessment Review published its interim report just this afternoon. And from that review, will come the rich and broad curriculum our children need and deserve, delivered by expert teachers, raising the floor of high standards below which schools must not slip, above which they can build and innovate with no ceiling on what they can achieve.

And when it comes to the safety and life chances of our children, I am always impatient. So ask the members opposite just for one moment to put aside their rhetoric and gimmickry and consider what their constituents actually want. Not their friends in high places, not their friends in the commentariat, not their friends in the Westminster bubble, but parents up and down this country. Parents want qualified teachers at the front of their children's classroom. Parents want the assurance of knowing for sure what their child is being taught.

Parents want more teachers in our schools better trained and supported. Parents want free breakfast clubs in their child's primary school. Parents want cheaper uniforms that don't set them back at the start of every term. Parents want stronger safeguards for children after horrific incidents that we have certainly seen in recent years. So members opposite oppose this bill, that is what they are opposing. And let me talk in the vaguest of terms about the supposed horror this bill will unleash. We've seen it all before.

Just months ago, they told us that Labour's plans to end private schools tax breaks would send a flood of children into state schools that would overrun them. Scaremongering. I've lost count of all the doom laden stories, but they come to pass? Absolutely not. Once again on the wrong side of parents. Once again resisting change and protecting privilege. And it speaks to a wider point. The Conservative Party are just lost. They are so out of ideas. Clinging onto the misguided hope that the public will just forget the last 14 years as if they never happened.

But it wasn't all for nothing. But it was, and Labour is cleaning up the mess that they left behind. To ensure that every child has a safe loving home, to put money back into parents pockets and to drive high and rising standards in all of our schools, to deliver the bright future every child in our country deserves, and I commend this bill to the House.
19:35
Laura Trott Portrait Rt Hon Laura Trott MP (Sevenoaks, Conservative)
-
-
The question is that the Bill be now read a third time. I call the shadow Secretary of State.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I had hoped that during the common stages of this bill the common stages of this bill the government would listen to the vast number of respected voices from the education sector who have warned repeatedly that this ill thought through bill is nothing short of a through bill is nothing short of a disaster for education standards in disaster for education standards in this country. But unfortunately, the Secretary of State failed to listen Secretary of State failed to listen to the children's Commissioner who warned that children will spend longer in failing schools because of this bill.

Or Catherine Bill Singh who argued that if passed,... This is how they treat one of the best head teachers in this country. She warned that if passed, the impact on our children, especially the most vulnerable will be seismic. She will not listen to the former chief and is of OFSTED who described the bill as many pronged assault on school standards. Or Lord Harris, who supported the party at the last election and said the bill will only harm the most disadvantaged harm the most disadvantaged families.

Even some of their own backbenchers have asked the Secretary of State to think again. Why did she think she knows better? Instead of engaging constructively with this criticism, the approach from the Secretary of State has been to resort to personal attacks. In response to Amanda Spielman's sensible suggestion that there should be an analysis of the impacts of autonomy in schools before a legislation abolishing it is forced through the House of Commons. A government source went on the record to denigrate a former senior public servant in the most personal of terms.

Did the Secretary of State sign off this briefing? In her own opinion piece in the Telegraph today, the Secretary of State told me and the shadow team to get out of London. She appears not to have noticed the work of star academies, Delta academies trust, United learning, Trinity, and inspiration trust amongst many others. These are brilliant trusts changing the lives of young people who she so casually dismisses. But I have assessed the suggest -- I have a suggestion for this active state return.

The secretary of state should visit Wales. Wales where the Labour Party have been charge for 26 years. Wales, the blueprint for her reforms. And Wales, which currently finds itself at the bottom of the rankings for the whole of the UK in maths, English and science. The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster said today that his party would never do anything to harm social mobility. Yet this bill will be devastating for social mobility. The Labour benches need to understand the consequences of this bill.

The evidence, should they care to read it, is overwhelming. The IFS have said very clearly that the differences in policy and approach have led to the terrible outcomes in Wales the disadvantaged young people. Indeed, disadvantaged young people in England do as well as the average child in Wales. And yet, these are the policies that they want to implement in England. How on earth can they justify imposing the same policies and approach that have been such a disaster in Wales? This bill at a single stroke undermines all the work that has been done by successive governments of all parties, head teachers and trusts over so many years.

Academy trust heads have been abused actually during this debate, and attacked by unions in this process because they dared to one better for young people under their care. Former Labour and Conservative education secretaries who have driven through reforms in the face of fierce opposition are being undermined by this bill. I cannot believe that the government will undo all of that for no reason. There is no evidence whatsoever that their proposals will improve a single school. In fact, the evidence is clear that they will make things worse.

The Secretary of State is putting ideology in the interest of union bosses over what is best for children and parents. This is a bill of two halves. The first on safeguarding, we agree absolutely with the principal. But the second is a policy equivalent of a wrecking ball. It will destroy the consensus over two decades on what improves schools. It is discredited, disastrous for school standards, and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

we will never stop fighting it. The question is that the bill be now read a third time. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." Division! Clear
19:40
19:53
19:53
19:54
Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon MP (Strangford, Democratic Unionist Party)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is always a pleasure to set and the your chairmanship and not only intervene but make the only intervene but make the adjournment debate for a change. I thank the Speaker for what I asked for. I hoped to have a classmate but it was not possible so tonight was there to have it. I have kept my shamrock from last Wednesday. I thank the honourable lady and we were at an event and it is moist and fresh and so I kept it for tonight, special, so I could wear it for the occasion.

It is my pleasure to contribute to this. The potential merits of making St Patrick's Day UK holiday is why I have brought this forward. I stand as a pro-Unionist who is happy to say I hope everyone enjoyed St Patrick's Day. They should have. I always enjoy it. At the start of my lead, I was not sure about St Patrick's Day because it seemed to be taken over by one section of the community but then I realised when I looked into the issue of Saint Patrick that he was very clearly everybody's.

For the last 40-50-odd years of my life, I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

have thanked Saint Patrick for the purpose of why he is your. I did not think I would have to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I did not think I would have to wait so long to be the first intervention for the honourable member for Strangford. I congratulate him on this debate and congratulate him on this debate and he is right to discuss that elements of St Patrick's day, our pictures of St Patrick's day, our pictures in. It is St Patrick's cross that in. It is St Patrick's cross that represents us on the national flag. Does he believe the St Patrick's cross needs greater official cross needs greater official recognition? I thank the honourable member for East Belfast.

I do. I was going to mention it later in my speech. The reason I am here is not to do with politics but the message of Saint Patrick and the gospel and I will be clear on what I intend to say in my comments. I love to see the joy on people's faces and the fun that comes from parades and events throughout the year and it is my desire that rather than turning the rivers Green for a Saint Patrick as they do in some parts of the world, we focus on the message and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

why it is important. Absolutely. A few weeks ago, we had the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

A few weeks ago, we had the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

A few weeks ago, we had the tragic loss of David -- Graham tragic loss of David -- Graham Murray who was a stalwart of the rugby club and a leader on and off the pitch who leaves behind a four- year-old son and his wife who I met recently, pregnant with their second recently, pregnant with their second child. Will the honourable member join me in sending condolences to join me in sending condolences to his family and friends in Beckenham and in Ireland and paid tribute to John and everyone at the rugby club

**** Possible New Speaker ****

who have rallied around them and showing the best of our community in recent weeks. I thank the honourable member. He spoke to me beforehand and showed me spoke to me beforehand and showed me the comments. Our thoughts and the comments. Our thoughts and the comments. Our thoughts and Are with them, as I'm sure others are as well and we put forward my sympathy for the family and he's outlined clearly what we should focus on. We focus on many things focus on.

We focus on many things and this debate gives us the chance to reassure the family of the promise that the message of Saint Patrick brings for us all in this chamber. And if I can use the occasion, I understand the honourable gentleman is an assiduous MP and has some family members in my constituency and I thank them, as he tells me, for they are votes in real

**** Possible New Speaker ****

life. I hope you don't mind me saying that. We may be deviating from the topic of the debate, Jim Shannon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

topic of the debate, Jim Shannon. Thank you very much. I believe we look past the message of the man and look past the message of the man and there will be few in the House who there will be few in the House who would disagree that the holiday should be UK-wide as should all be holidays for the patron saints of each mission. Saint Patrick was born to a Christian family in Wales in the late fourth century and before the late fourth century and before he was 16 he was captured from the villa of his father.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

The honourable member needs to sit in the appropriate part of the chamber to make an intervention. Mr Sharon, you should continue. Speak six years, he escaped onto Britain six years, he escaped onto Britain and has religious faith was strengthened during his time. It is strengthened during his time. It is a wonderful story, a great story of love and missionary and Christianity. I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Christianity. I will give way. I thank the honourable member very much and I thank you, Madam very much and I thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for your guidance. My apologies. The legend of Saint My apologies. The legend of Saint Patrick is very famous and we Scots like to think he was born in Kilpatrick, in Scotland. Whenever he was born, it should be remembered that the thing he represents are things that we can all gather round. I think the fact that the celebrations are so lively probably

**** Possible New Speaker ****

does have something to do with the fact that he was Scottish. Controversial, Mr Sharon. Controversial indeed. I thank the honourable ability for the honourable ability for the intervention. I could probably case intervention. I could probably case we should all look at Saint Patrick as one, Scotland, Wales, Northern as one, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland. How wonderful it is to see Ireland. How wonderful it is to see the ability of the union at work within Saint Patrick who was a British man who fell in love with British man who fell in love with the people but his love of God made him one of the people who mistreated him.

We will be man of him coming good and the fight for the wee man and we women all the time. He was a former slave who changed the nation

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I commend him for securing this debate. Sadly many now see St debate. Sadly many now see St Patrick as a time for drinking and excess, and that's really against everything that Patrick stood for. My honourable friend agree with me that Patrick was in fact ahead of that Patrick was in fact ahead of his time when you think of the exposure of the gospel of Jesus Christ and the fact that he told Christ and the fact that he told people they needed salvation, the death of Jesus Christ on the cross and their native repentance.

So when and their native repentance. So when we wear our shamrock, weekly not think of the myths and legends but

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the true gospel of Jesus Christ. I will come to that right now. It's absolute right. I have It's absolute right. I have marvelled at the way St Patrick made theology understandable for those with no education, no access to holy with no education, no access to holy books and no ability to read them. books and no ability to read them. This is the St Patrick I believe we should celebrate and honour, a man who loved Jesus, wanted the world to know him, not hampered by a nomination or doctrine.

Saint nomination or doctrine. Saint Patrick's message as applicable today as it was 1,600 years ago. today as it was 1,600 years ago. Christ has a plan for those who put their trust in him. We have a service to glorify God and help our fellow man first of the cultural history of St Patrick is clear through my constituency. With touches of his message spanning throughout indeed as you walk through the hello halls of this very place, Saint Patrick's prominent position is clear in central lobby, and I glance up daily and pride at the place within this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland symbolising St David, St Andrew and St George.

It's wonderful to have is altogether within this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

great United Kingdom. I think Kim for giving way, and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think Kim for giving way, and in respect my Celtic brother in his in respect my Celtic brother in his pride as a unionist. Of course I'm a proud Nationalist, and prove perhaps that the Irish will always rise because they represent the Scottish because they represent the Scottish constituency, but would you agree that if I understand his mission correctly, that if we were to agree to a UK bank holiday for St Patrick, we might also have to agree the one we might also have to agree the one for St Andrew, St George and St David and these matters are more appropriate for the devolved

**** Possible New Speaker ****

assemblies to consider. We might have different aspirations. One for unity, one for aspirations. One for unity, one for independence, but nonetheless, the honourable gentleman and I are good honourable gentleman and I are good friends and have been for a long time and will continue to be. Can I suggest that the next adjournment

**** Possible New Speaker ****

debates that very issue. Thank you. I think the honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I think the honourable member for giving way and congratulate him. I think before he heard in response to the last heard in response to the last speaker, already had the Scottish claim of St Patrick. The Welsh actually I believe also tried to claim him as well. We know he is our patron saint, so maybe that's why the member's motion thinks that St Patrick should really be that symbolic head for the whole of the United Kingdom.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the member. Couldn't have put it better. Thank you. That was absolutely brilliant, well done. absolutely brilliant, well done. It's my firm belief that much good comes from instilling national pride and identity into a young people in terms of self-esteem, but developed of our local economy from the of our local economy from the celebrations. I also would highlight the good that can come from establishing saint's days as establishing saint's days as national bank holidays. Saint Patrick's Day is celebrated in England, Scotland and Wales, the England, Scotland and Wales, the beauty of these collective nations as the strong bond of our shared history.

Travel delivered full at Edinburgh -- to Liverpool, to Edinburgh, and see if there is an appetite to celebrate St Patrick it's clear. All of the world but in Scotland and Wales and indeed across England as well. Some of my colleagues in the DUP took the opportunity to head to Washington to meet with the president of the United States recently, and enjoy building that bond that can only be beneficial to our nation. We in Northern Ireland use the word we all the time. It's one of those words we always use.

Based on the shared heritage of the US and the UK, and Northern Ireland in particular. But the US present having Scots roots and the vice principal JD Vance having Ulster Scots heritage, what better time for those who care for Northern Ireland and want to see how prosperous we can develop relationships with the Americans will be mutually beneficial. Low business rates, connectivity, high quality of life for staff and the fact that the famous Chick-fil-A Northern Ireland I believe, speaks volumes of what could be accomplished between our nations.

I love chicken I have to say, and I think it's OK to eat as a diabetic. I would take this opportunity to thank our deputy first Minister and economy minister for their visit to EU to solidify that beneficial relationship. They more than others understand the value of relationships rather than pointless grandstanding or pointscoring. Whilst the Americans will have no idea or care for those who believe that they are above the US and Northern Ireland trade links, they will have a clear picture of who came and what they have to offer, and that to me is again reminiscent of the message of St Patrick, the hand of friendship to all.

And I handout everyone in this chamber,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and who in turn handed back to me. Grateful to the honourable gentleman of the extension of his hand of friendship. He's touched on Yukon minister, deputy first Minister being in Washington, wondered if he would extend the acknowledgement of the health minister who I believe was in Washington last week.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Washington last week. Yes, he was there as well. And I'm very respectful of others who I'm very respectful of others who were there that I haven't named as well, but thank you for that question. I could think of two or question. I could think of two or three names I won't mention. I do not believe that we have fully grasped the potential merits and making Saint Patrick's Day a totally global phenomenon, not just the cities across the world to enjoy but for people to come and enjoy in each of our formations will stop the saint who bonds us all could and should be promoted by us all.

The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

man from Britain... Thank you. Considering the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Considering the significance of the origins of St Patrick, a British Saint born in Roman Britain, possibly near the end Roman Britain, possibly near the end of the fourth century, when combined with his lasting contributions on religion, culture and history right across the United Kingdom, with a across the United Kingdom, with a member agree with me this underscores the value of recognising a UK national holiday in his name.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

a UK national holiday in his name. I thank him. We've been friends

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him. We've been friends for many years, long before he was elected to this House as an MLA and way back even before that when we in the council many moons ago. His words everything added exactly emphasis to the issue of what we are trying to achieve here. And I truly believe the first step in recognising the ties that bind Saint Patrick's Day as a UK holiday first of I'm pleased to see the Minister in his place. He spoke to me last night and said I'm looking forward your debate and he smiled the whole way through.

And I'm quite sure that his response will be one that will enhance this. I attended the Irish

**** Possible New Speaker ****

session in the walkie for... I was giving the honourable member the opportunity to perhaps member the opportunity to perhaps correct the record, but I must state for the record that Saint Patrick was born in my constituency. Of West was born in my constituency. Of West Dunbartonshire. He was not born in Dunbartonshire. He was not born in Kilpatrick Mackie was in Kilpatrick in the year 387. But more in the year 387. But more importantly than that, my wife Alison Patricia McAllister was born on Saint Patrick's day, and she celebrated her birthday Monday, and does the honourable member agree that she deserves a holiday every day on her birthday?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I can't say that, the chamber won't be over it. But can I say this, I wish your wife all happy returns and I'm sure when you are returns and I'm sure when you are here, she is probably more happy here, she is probably more happy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

than ever. I say that in jest. He's extending birthday wishes for those who celebrate on 17 March. for those who celebrate on 17 March. My father had his birthday on 17 March. I'd invite my honourable colleague to send him happy birthday

**** Possible New Speaker ****

wishes too. Of course I will. The honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Of course I will. The honourable member long before he became a member here, he and I have been friends for some four or five years, friends for some four or five years, because under that, I followed his progress as a counsellor and very much welcome here to this chamber. much welcome here to this chamber. Look forward to its friendship and the whole way through. I wishes dad

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the whole way through. I wishes dad every happiness in his birthday. For the record and matters of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For the record and matters of accuracy, when the honourable gentleman talks about app, he means

**** Possible New Speaker ****

WhatsApp. Is not technically minded, he is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

absolutely right. Can I congratulate the honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I congratulate the honourable gentleman? I want to be clear, St Patrick was not born in Stoke-on- Trent, that I think we can be certain. But in genuine sincerity the fact we all here this evening in joyful spirits discussing the potential of Saint Patrick's Day being a UK bank holiday does demonstrate the importance of the nationstate in bringing people together, think what the honourable together, think what the honourable gentleman said about being taught our children to understand their identity, too often the St.

George's Cross is misappropriated by people with nefarious means. It's our flag, we own it just as the Saint Patrick's Cross is the honourable gentleman's flag. It's important we use them in celebrating, and I think you will agree with me that we can teach children about their history and their future.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Always brings wise words to any debate. I told him on Monday in Westminster Hall he said a few Westminster Hall he said a few comments, and I was greatly impressed by the honourable gentleman's contribution. Your words gentleman's contribution. Your words today were very wise, your words today were very wise, your words just now also. I don't have any difficulty going there. They have no difficulty going there. They have no difficulty with me going there. I think what Essien St Patrick is the gospel that he brought everybody wherever they are within these wherever they are within these Celtic nations whether Wales or Scotland or England or Ireland, those are the things they happened to very much enjoy.

I'm going to end with this, very conscious if the Minister wants to give me a very fulsome response, and reinforce our request. The words of St Patrick are what I leave with you now. I want to make the most of the advantages of our heritage in St Patrick but more than this, I want the truth of his words to make changes in assault today, and that comes from the love of Christ, which is his message the whole way through. And I believe it's a message we as Christians should impress and deliver to those made in this House, I have a veritable philosophy, be nice to everybody.

It's not hard to be nice, be kind, and do that in the best way you can. Saint Patrick's words are this, Christ with me, Christ before me, Christ behind me, Christ in me, Christ beneath me, Christ above me, Christ on my right, Christ on my left, Christ when I lay down, Christ when I sit down, Christ when I rise, Christ in the heart of every man who thinks of me, Christ in the mouth of everyone who speaks of me.

Christ in every high that sees me, Christ in every ear that he is me. If we had those thoughts in our mind every day, I believe we would be better as a nation, better to ourselves as individuals, and show the love that Patrick showed through the gospel he brought from Wales to Ireland back to England and back to us again. He is our patron saint, Saint Patrick, he will always be our patron saint. Others may claim him, but they are not getting him.

And I do say this in all kindness and love to the honourable gentleman, tonight we are asking for something I hope that the Minister can give us a good positive response, and can I thank all the right honourable honourable members taking the time to come to the adjournment debate that I didn't

**** Possible New Speaker ****

intervene in? Waiting for the positive response

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Waiting for the positive response from the Minister.
20:13
Justin Madders Portrait Justin Madders MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Ellesmere Port and Bromborough, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

from the Minister. Thank you. First of all, can I congratulate the honourable member the strength for securing the agenda debate first of I know he's not debate first of I know he's not familiar with the operation of adjournment debates, so I'm glad he has found his way here this evening, and of course if he does want to intervene, he will have that 10 minutes to do so. We wouldn't want that street to be broken would we? That I'd like to wish him and everyone a belated but very happy Saint Patrick's Day.

I enjoyed hearing his contribution. What Saint Patrick's Day means to him and indeed to his community within Northern Ireland, and no he spoken very passionately about the subject on a number of previous occasions, as we would expect him to. And in preparation for the debate, I did contact my family historian, my mum to understand my Irish roots and going back several generations, there is a fair bit over there. So pleased to report that I had one pint of Guinness yesterday to mark the occasion.

But the government has appreciate the deep cultural and religious significance of Saint Patrick's Day to many nationalists and unionists across Northern Ireland. Some of whom Revilla St Patrick for his role in the arrival and growth of Christianity on the island, and a thing as the honourable member said, he is actually for everybody. It's also a cherished day for those who served in the Irish regiment in the British Army with the annual presentation of the shamrock to the members of the Royal family. The familial relationship with Ireland and Northern Ireland are so important people across the UK as it is to this government.

By way of just one example, our NHS is stronger for the contributions of many Irish nationals who serve in it today and have done so since its founding. The most recent statistics from June 2023 showed that nearly 40,000 members of NHS staff were Irish, including doctors, nurses and of course support staff. And following the recent general election in Ireland, the second state for Northern Ireland and the tarnished day have discussed the strength of the bilateral relationship our shared commitment to the Good Friday Agreement and the importance of upholding political stability in upholding political stability in We have also increased engagements between the governments and the first took place on March 5, close to where I live in the constituency but my invite did not reach me for some reason, I do not know why that was.

It was clear that they have agreed a joint vision of cooperation through to 2030, bringing our two countries together like never before and through the British and Irish International Conference, we are engaging regularly on matters of shared concern. Many people across the world look forward to the annual St Patrick's Day celebrations will showcase the significant contributions of Irish people and this year we saw parades through Belfast, Glasgow, Liverpool, Leeds, Trafalgar Square. If the honourable member wants to intervene, he knows how to.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I felt it was important to do so

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I felt it was important to do so because the diaspora in the UK, England, Scotland, Wales, is massive. Not just the NHS but massive. Not just the NHS but You look at Belfast, there are workers going to build in London and going back at the weekend and the diaspora goes as far as farmers and diaspora goes as far as farmers and businessmen and the connection between England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, enormous. The diaspora wants to have St Patrick's

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Day as a UK bank holiday as well. I thank the honourable member for the intervention and I'm sure if I took some pulling, it would be simple. Some reasons we might not be simple. Some reasons we might not be able to grant his wish on this able to grant his wish on this occasion, so... During the recent visit of the Secretary of State to Washington, he participated in the annual St Patrick's Day events engaged with the US administration, congressional members, business leaders, key stakeholders, promoting Northern Ireland is a fantastic Northern Ireland is a fantastic place to live and work and discussing access to the UK single market.

I am pleased the Secretary Of State For Northern Ireland this year to date and she's been active with community and business leaders

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in Stormont. I will give way. Happy St Patrick's Day. It is time to bring people together and often in local pubs. The honourable often in local pubs. The honourable member join me in thanking Irish pub landlords up and down the country including Michael Duffy and Joe including Michael Duffy and Joe Duffy and Beckham? Three I join him in congratulating the Duffy brothers in congratulating the Duffy brothers for their contribution and he will be visiting shortly to remind them of the publicity he has given to the local business in his constituency.

Turning to the honourable member's speech, it is already a bank holiday in Northern Ireland, providing people the opportunity to mark this occasion. The Banking and Financial Dealings Act specifies which days are bank holidays each year and contains provision for substitute days and Mark 17 is a bank holiday in Northern Ireland. The decision to create additional bank holiday in Northern Ireland was taken against the backdrop of the economic, social, cultural systems and the current pattern of bank holidays is well established that the government does not have any plans to extend the St Patrick's Day bank holiday to other parts of the UK.

Bank holidays are devolved to the Scottish government and so Scottish ministers are responsible for these decisions and I will therefore speak of the matter in terms of the merits of a St Patrick's Day bank holiday in Wales and England only. It would benefit those who celebrate it including members of the Irish diaspora in the UK and certain sectors of the economy like pubs and restaurants might benefit from increased expenditure on a bank holiday. It is a significant tourist draw to Northern Ireland so we would expect it would draw more visitors from England and Wales over there, however, the overall cost to the economy of an additional bank holiday is considerable with the latest analysis estimating the cost for one bank holiday at around £2 million.

This estimate is derived from the income assessment for the bank holiday weekend held for the Jubilee in 2022 and it could impact public services because bank holiday that the closure of schools and tribunal zone could disrupt NHS services from routine operations. There is no statutory right to time off for bank holidays and this off for bank holidays and this depends on the terms of an employee's contract and like other terms and conditions of employment, this is a matter for negotiation between employers and workers and so even if it was extended to England and Wales, not all workers could take it off, for example, many NHS and emergency service workers and we've heard many from Ireland might still be required to work.

We regularly receive requests for bank holidays for various events Darduk

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much indeed. Many

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much indeed. Many people born in Ireland like myself and my wife call Northern Ireland and my wife call Northern Ireland their home and let many of them I their home and let many of them I celebrated St Patrick's Day in a local pub at the weekend. The Minister touched other bank holidays and I wonder if you will find time and I wonder if you will find time to meet me at one stage to discuss the benefits of making St George's Day a bank holiday.

Speak about the Day a bank holiday. Speak about the honourable member tempts me to get into another bank holiday but the arguments would be the same in terms of the economic cost, I am afraid. We should celebrate St George's Day more in this country. Of all we have no plans for a St Patrick's Day bank holiday in England and Wales, I would strongly encourage employers to respond to request for leave to celebrate St Patrick's Day or any other cultural events including Magna Carta De St George's Day.

It is important we take time out to celebrate these events and I thank the honourable member for securing the important debate and the message she came with us of St Patrick's Day being one of unity is one I share with him.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that this House do now adjourn. As many as of that do now adjourn. As many as of that opinion, say, "Aye.". The ayes have
20:28
None Portrait Issue of Writ
-

20:28
20:28
None Portrait Issue of Writ
-

20:28
20:29
20:50
20:52
None Portrait Issue of Writ
-

20:52
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page