Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Baroness Cass Excerpts

Tuesday 20th May 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Johnson of Marylebone (Con)]

My Lords, proposed new paragraph (c) in this amendment touches on the Bill’s purpose of removing barriers to opportunity. It raises my concern about the Bill in general that, as my noble friend Lord Young said in his excellent remarks, we are being encouraged to consider this legislation somewhat blind and flying in the dark. That is because we have not yet had either the full final report of the Becky Francis review into curriculum and qualifications or the Government’s response to it. This is essential for a fair and full consideration of this legislation. This review is not just another consultation or call for evidence but the Government’s flagship review of curriculum and qualifications which is examining exactly this matter of how we remove barriers to opportunity in our system.

We already know, however, that the relentless narrowing of options at age 16 is clearly not helping learners in this transition to level 3 study. Some 5% of 16 to 17 year-olds are NEET, up from 3.9% in 2015. This is an exceptionally worrying trend, and the Department for Education’s relentless quest to further narrow options through the defunding of applied general qualifications such as BTECs will not help matters at all. T-levels, while well intentioned, are not proving suitable for most learners. Just 2% of the cohort are enrolled on T-levels, compared to almost 20% pursuing applied general qualifications such as BTECs. By pressing ahead with the further defunding of those remaining BTECs after 2027, the Government will increase the number of young people who feel that there is no place for them in our system.

For us to do our job properly, this Bill and the curriculum review running alongside it must be seen together. We need to ensure that they work in concert so that all young people, not just the most academic, have an ambitious and achievable path forward at 16.

[Baroness Cass (CB)]

My Lords, as we have discussed at length, this is a multifaceted Bill, so I would welcome our achieving greater clarity of purpose. Without purpose, there is no focus, and we can get very lost in complexity. As we progress through Committee, I ask noble Lords to consider the opportunities offered in this Bill to improve well-being through healthier young lives. Let us not lose sight of health, because without good, healthy young people there is no opportunity for learning or well-being. I am talking about both physical and mental health.

When I was president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health between 2012 and 2015, we had slipped over the preceding 15 years to being one of the worst-performing countries in Europe for infant and child mortality. Mortality, in particular infant mortality, is used globally as a sensitive indicator of the health of a nation. It is the canary in the coal mine for how we are looking after children and young people; it signals alarm if that is not going well. Since then, we have seen infant mortality rise among infants born to poor families while it continues to fall among the wealthy. We are looking at a variety of public health issues that should give us pause for thought, including poorer vaccine uptake and worsening health inequalities more generally, in particular obesity. Between 2014 and 2019, teenage mortality edged up rather than down, and noble Lords are well aware that teen mental health is deteriorating.

In relation to the Bill, it is important that we think carefully about how we are using the public health workforce, such as school nurses and others, and give careful consideration to the multiple pulls on their time and how different parts of the Bill differentially pull on those resources. Equally, we must consider how significant system change is going to impact designated doctors and nurses, whose carefully worked out roles are, at best, stretched, so that those do not become further stretched by the changes in the systems.

During the passage of the Bill, we should consider carefully exactly what is going to happen to that precious workforce, which we should use to maximal effect. I hope the Minister can give us her thoughts on how care will be given to that aspect.

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Baroness Cass Excerpts

Thursday 1st May 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Cass (CB)]

My Lords, I am pleased to take part in this important debate. I draw attention to my interests set out in the register.

In bringing forward this Bill, the Government should be commended on their many laudable objectives in strengthening the safeguarding of children, removing barriers to opportunities in schools and improving the safety of the education system. However, any legislation addressing the subject of safeguarding children, and opportunity and safety in schools, cannot ignore the impact of digital technology on the lives of children and young people. Safety and opportunity—and, indeed, risk—have to be seen in relation to the contemporary world of 2025 and not the world as it was well over a decade ago.

We all appreciate the many benefits that the online world can bring to children and young people, so we do not need to rehearse those here. However, a visit to the NSPCC website provides a helpful listing of harms that children can suffer. It expands beyond the four classic categories of abuse to list 13 types of abuse. Most of these, including cyberbullying, emotional abuse, sexual abuse and exploitation, and grooming can be carried out online and even during school hours. It is not, however, just deliberate harm that should concern us; that is just the tip of the iceberg. There are multiple other risks associated with digital technology that have been discussed in this House, including adverse effects on learning, attention, sleep, educational attainment and mental health. Addictive apps are a particular problem, especially for boys.

My noble friend Lady Kidron and I recently hosted a meeting which brought together Peers with clinicians and academics in the field of child health. Among them were senior leaders within the medical community. The group was clear that we cannot wait for the evidence to give us all the answers about the adverse effects of digital technology and how to mitigate them. The evidence we already have, coupled with the views of young people, parents and teachers, is powerful enough that it would be negligent not to start taking action. The strong sense in the room was that this is a public health emergency. We need to learn through action, studying the approaches that are most impactful in harnessing technology for benefit while protecting vulnerable developing minds.

This is not just an issue of whether we ban smartphones in schools. There is a wide array of possible actions that can be part of a strategic, multifaceted approach to the problem. For example, RSE is compulsory in schools, yet there is no requirement to teach young people how to manage the digital technology that occupies so many hours of their lives, nor indeed to include appropriate training for the staff who are teaching our infants or older children. There is insufficient consideration of the impact of loss of safe play spaces, which would give children alternative recreational activities to spending time on their digital devices. There is no focus on providing education and advice to parents on how to manage access to technology so that they can facilitate their children’s learning and development.

I very much hope that the Government will be receptive to a range of amendments that will address these deficits in the Bill, and thus gift our children with a safer and healthier future. Without such measures, we are looking at losing a generation to poor mental health and at even more young adults being unable to contribute to the workforce. This is not just a moral problem but an economic timebomb that we can ill afford.