Independent Schools: Tax Changes

Baroness Laing of Elderslie Excerpts

Thursday 17th September 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Laing of Elderslie (Con)]

My Lords, what a pleasure it is to see my noble friend Lord Lexden back in his place this afternoon and to hear from him in his usual erudite fashion on a subject on which he has the experience and expertise of many decades. We have all benefited from hearing him this afternoon. I agree with everything that he said and all the points made by the noble Lord, Lord Alton, and my noble friend Lord Redwood, so I will not repeat those points.

I ask just one question: who is the most damaged by this policy brought forward by this Government? There is no point in asking who benefits most, because nobody benefits. The Minister will undoubtedly say that the Exchequer benefits to a very small amount in tax take and that some of that tax take can be invested in education generally, but that is not a strong argument. The fact is that our children’s education is the responsibility of everyone in our society, because we all want the coming generation to have the very best start and opportunity in life. The better educated our population is, the better the economic hope for future generations. We all want to see a better education system, but dividing it into 93% and 7% and pretending in some way that these are separate is simply nonsense. The education system is one system as a whole. It affects every young person and every child in our society, in every part of our country. If you damage any part of the education system, logically, you damage it all. So, my question is: who suffers the most?

The answer is not the families who are genuinely wealthy and who are despised by this Government but who will go on paying for their children in independent education. The people who suffer are, as ever, those who are at the margins. First, there are the 33,000 children who have had to be removed from independent schools and sent to other schools. Clearly, they suffer. However, that means that 33,000 other children have been displaced from other schools. In any given geographical catchment area, one usually finds that there might be an independent school, possibly two independent schools, and three or four really good state schools—many of our state schools are excellent and provide an excellent education. Then there will be seven or eight state schools that do not provide an excellent education, because they have some disadvantages and some difficulties; they possibly do not have the parental support or they are possibly in an area that suffers from some other disadvantages. The children who most benefit from attending an excellent state school are those who are at the margin, lifted out of an area of disadvantage, taken away from a school where they would not have flourished and have the opportunity of going to an excellent state school that will give them a truly good start in life. Those are the children who will suffer most from this Government’s policy.

The children who have left the independent schools are likely to live in the catchment area of an excellent state school and are likely to have parents who know what you have to do to get your child into such a school. A child who has parents who understand the education system and who contribute to the education system is likely to succeed and to have a good opportunity, regardless of whether they go to an independent school or an excellent state school. Those who will suffer are those who would have had the chance of a place at an excellent state school but have lost that place because it has now been taken by a child who had previously been at an independent school but who has vociferous middle-class parents who know what to do to get the best education for their children. The children who will suffer are those whose parents are not involved in the education system, are not well educated themselves and do not know how to get their children into the excellent state schools.

I am not making this up. This is fact. When I was a constituency Member of Parliament—I know that your Lordships do not like one mentioning being a Member of Parliament and representing a constituency, but when you have done so for 27 years, as the Minister knows very well, it is in your heart and in your being—I personally dealt with hundreds of families who were trying to get their children into the best schools. I know what is now happening. Places at the excellent state schools are being taken by children who were previously at independent schools but whose parents can no longer afford it. The people who will be most damaged by this policy and the direction in which the Government are taking the education system are those children who are now being denied places at excellent state schools. They are the people who we should be lifting up in life, not putting down. They are the people who deserve every bit of help that we as a community as a whole can give them.

It might be that whoever devised this government policy—they did not do it to raise more money for the Exchequer because that, as we know from the simple arithmetic, is incidental—thought that they were going to damage the despised middle classes. That is not who is being damaged. The people who are being damaged are the children who would have had an opportunity that has now been taken away from them. The Government say that they care about the 93%; I care about 100% of children in this country, and I hope that the Government will recognise that they are failing those at the margin and should change this policy.

Schools: Mobile Phones

Baroness Laing of Elderslie Excerpts

Monday 12th May 2025 Lords Chamber

Asked by

[Baroness Laing of Elderslie]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to ensure mobile phones are kept out of schools.

[The Minister of State, Department for Education (Baroness Smith of Malvern) (Lab)]

My Lords, mobile phones have no place in our schools. The Government’s Mobile Phones in Schools guidance is clear that schools should prohibit the use of devices with smart technology throughout the school day, including during lessons, transitions and breaks. We expect all schools to take steps in line with this guidance to ensure that mobile phones do not disrupt pupils’ learning. If pupils fail to follow those rules, schools have the power to confiscate devices.

[Baroness Laing of Elderslie (Con)]

I thank the Minister for her optimistic Answer to my Question. I wonder how many noble Lords are at this very moment distracted by the smartphone that they have with them. I look around and I see quite a few. Imagine then what it must be like to be the teacher of a class of 11 year-olds and to try to hold their attention when they have their smartphones beside them.

The Minister has given an optimistic Answer and I had hoped for unanimity in this matter, because all the evidence, all the experts, agree, as I think the Minister has just agreed, that having a smartphone with them at all times causes harm, both educationally and socially, to children and young people. To bring about the change that is necessary, will the Minister show some leadership and agree to the amendment that my noble friends have submitted to the education Bill that is about to come to Parliament?

[Baroness Smith of Malvern (Lab)]

Well, my optimism is based not just on vain hope but, of course, on the most recent report from the Children’s Commissioner, which shows that the overwhelming majority of schools—99.8% of primary schools and 90% of secondary schools—already have policies in place that limit or restrict the use of mobile phones during the school day. There is ample opportunity, through both the guidance and the autonomy and wisdom of head teachers, to ensure that we make considerable progress on this issue, as we have already seen.