3 Ashley Fox debates involving the Department for Education

Oral Answers to Questions

Ashley Fox Excerpts
Monday 2nd March 2026

(1 day, 11 hours ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Georgia Gould Portrait Georgia Gould
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s constituent, whose courage, commitment and care for others in the most impossible circumstances is truly inspiring. In the schools White Paper, we committed to consulting on changes to the school admissions code to promote fairness for all families. As part of that work, we will be looking at how to ensure that cases such as this are better supported through admissions policy in the future and, in the meantime, that schools and admissions authorities make use of the social and medical criteria.

Ashley Fox Portrait Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

T3. In 2023, Parliament legislated to protect freedom of speech on our university campuses, but we are still waiting for the Government to bring section 8 of the Act into force, so will the Minister set out a clear timetable for commencing the complaints scheme to ensure that our academics are protected from censorship and silencing?

Bridget Phillipson Portrait Bridget Phillipson
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

Yes, we intend to do that shortly. To be clear, universities should be places of open discussion, where academics can operate freely and everyone is exposed to views that they may sometimes find challenging and with which they may disagree. We have commenced many of the provisions within the Act that are upholding and safeguarding free speech and academic freedom in our universities.

Independent Faith Schools: VAT

Ashley Fox Excerpts
Thursday 26th February 2026

(5 days, 11 hours ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.

Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the impact of VAT on independent faith schools.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. I hope that this debate will go well. I welcome the Minister to her place and look forward to engaging with her. I have given her a copy of my speaking notes; the last two pages are my asks. I also thank the hon. Member for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire (Ian Sollom), who is here as the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, and the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Joy Morrissey), who I think has been elevated to the role of Opposition spokesperson for this debate.

It is a real pleasure to raise the issue. It is certainly not the first time that we have discussed this move by the Government, which was announced when they came into power. I note that in the Public Gallery we have Dr Garrie-John Barnes, the new chief executive officer of the Christian Schools Trust; Steve Beegoo, the head of education at Christian Concern; and three people who are staff and parents at a small Christian school in Reading that is having to close because of the VAT and business rates relief policies. They are among the instigators for this debate, which I have secured on their behalf and on behalf of many others—I will outline who they are as I make progress through my speech.

For the record, my private secretary is also here: the lady in the corner of the Public Gallery. She writes all my speeches. I think people say, “My goodness, she’s overworked,” and she probably is, but there you are. She is not often here, but she is here for this debate and I thank her.

Although my sons and grandchildren all went through the publicly funded school system and have excelled in their own right, I have met many people who have made the difficult decision to pay towards their children’s education, not because they can afford to do so, but because their personal faith is at odds with the many moves away from the moral values and ethics that they cherish. That is their motivation, and that is why we are having this debate. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for giving me and other hon. Members the chance to contribute to it.

The idea that independent schools are for the ultra-wealthy is simply not true. I secured this debate for my Strangford constituents who attend the Bangor independent Christian school in the neighbouring constituency of North Down; for international students who attend Rockport, outside Belfast; for those who attend Holywood Steiner school; and for those who attend Jewish schools or Muslim schools. I do not need to agree with the theology to agree that pupils’ parents should have a school choice that reflects treasured, essential values.

I have been in touch with the Independent Schools Council, which represents about 1,400 schools across the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Those 1,400 schools represent roughly 80% of all UK pupils who attend fee-paying schools. According to the ISC’s most recent annual census, 663 of the schools among its membership have a religious affiliation or ethos, meaning that 47% of the schools that the ISC represents are faith schools. That reinforces my belief that we need to ensure that the Government look past the view that this is about rich parents, and that they understand the bigger faith picture. I hope to focus on that faith picture, as I hope other hon. Members will.

Overall, about 370,000 pupils attend an independent school in England with an identified religious ethos. That equates to some 60% of pupils at independent schools. It is not a small figure, and I say respectfully that it cannot be ignored. We need to address the issue. Although the majority of those schools are of Christian denomination, the independent sector also provides essential provision to minority faiths.

I talked to the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) today. He wanted to be here, but he has an event at 5 o’clock and it would have been too tight to attend this debate and then get to Birmingham. I think he is somewhere in Birmingham today.

About 20,000 pupils attend Islamic faith schools. The importance of faith schools is clear. All schools must follow the Equality Act 2010 and welcome every pupil, but issues around curriculum, diet and religious holidays can make it difficult for more religiously observant pupils to be accommodated in mainstream schools. Many independent faith schools therefore provide access to education in a religious context that is not always possible in the state sector. That can be Muslim, Jewish or Christian.

Fees in many independent faith schools are less than the state pays per pupil—circa £8,000—and in some cases community fundraising efforts support those who are less able to pay for education. For example, the average annual fee for Islamic schools in the ISC is about £3,000 per year. Chinuch UK is an organisation that represents some 20,000 Haredi Orthodox Jewish pupils attending 65 schools across the United Kingdom. On average, those schools typically ask for a voluntary contribution of less than £100 per week. The Christian Schools Trust represents 25 schools charging between £3,000 and £8,000 per year in fees, often with high levels of bursary provision. That gives us a bit of background, factually and financially.

The ISC has been tracking the impact of VAT on the sector as a whole. Although it may take a few years for us to see the full impact, it is clear that there has been an initial impact. Opposition to the VAT on independent schools, particularly independent faith schools, has been an aggravating factor for the parents back home in my constituency whose children attend the independent faith school in Bangor. They are not rich people. They are working people who scrimp and save to put money aside so that they can ensure that they will be in a position to provide the faith education that they wish for their children.

Although the data cannot be broken down to measure the impact of VAT on faith schools specifically, case studies make it clear that the impact has been felt strongly. On pupil movement from the independent sector to the state sector, the Treasury impact assessment of VAT states that

“a greater degree of impact may be felt by faith school pupils if they cannot be placed in an alternative school with the same religious denomination.”

I say respectfully to the Government that their policy has, in a way, discriminated against those from independent schools who might have, and probably do have, a religious denomination that they wish to adhere to and stay with.

The result has been that since the general election in July 2024, 110 independent schools have closed, of which 10 have been involved in mergers. There has been an impact on about 9,500 students, including almost 2,500 with special educational needs and disabilities. New independent schools that have opened are predominantly SEND schools, while those closing are mostly mainstream schools. Overall, we are seeing a net loss of mainstream provision. Whereas some of the new independent schools setting up are specifically looking after children with special educational needs, a great many others have been disaffected and have nowhere for their faith and educational and religious viewpoint to be retained.

In the schools that remain open, there has been a drop of 25,000, or 5.2%, in the number of students since 2023, according to the ISC’s September pupil numbers survey. The September 2025 pupil numbers survey showed a fall in pupil numbers of 17,000, or 3.6%, in the past academic year alone. Those stats show the unfortunate impact of what is happening, which is that having to pay VAT is putting many independent faith schools at a disadvantage. It is also notable that the September pupil numbers survey continued to show a larger fall in intake years, with reception and year 7 numbers down closer to 5% in the last academic year.

Although there might be some debate about the extent of the impact of VAT on pupil numbers, the fall is out of step with the normal trend of our pupil surveys and confirms the decline shown by the Department for Education’s figures and by the ISC census published in spring 2025. It is a trend that has happened directly because of VAT on independent schools. It puts them at a disadvantage, leaves them disaffected and confirms the decline. That cannot be ignored. What was portrayed as a tax on the rich has instead turned out to be a tax on those with a strong faith.

No one would expect me, as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief, to highlight the shortfall in religious freedom in other countries without highlighting a decision in this country, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, that is having an educational impact on those of a strong faith, whether that faith is Christian, Muslim or Jewish. My job as chair of the APPG is to highlight that in a way that I hope will come over strongly and show what the effect has been.

The decision to apply VAT to independent school fees was projected to raise some £1.5 billion annually. Although raising revenue is important—nobody denies that it is critical for the Government to raise revenue to pay the bills and pay for public services—we must ensure that the policy is proportionate and does not unintentionally harm those it was never meant to target. I do not doubt that the Government did not set out with the intention to effect the changes that are clearly happening in independent faith-based schools.

This debate is not and has never been about elite institutions charging some £30,000 a year for fees. I am talking about parents and young people such as those in my constituency who travel to the Bangor independent Christian school. They are not rich. They scrimp and save. They do not take holidays; they put their money aside so that the child can have an education at a faith-based school that can hopefully be of benefit to them.

This debate is about low-fee independent faith schools, many of which charge under £4,000 annually and which serve modest income families in Jewish, Muslim and Christian communities. For those families, faith-based education is not a luxury but a deep necessity. In many areas, there is no equivalent provision in the state sector that reflects their religious ethos. Alongside other hon. Members—including you, Sir Alec, based on comments that you have made in the Chamber—I want to protect that religious ethos on my constituents’ behalf.

The Independent Schools Council has proposed a simple and fair solution, which is my ask for the Minister. She will find it on pages 6 and 7 of my speaking notes. I am very conscious that we are asking for something that the Minister may not be able to confirm that she can do. My request is that she ask the responsible Treasury Minister to look at the comments and the solutions that have been put forward, which I believe may be helpful. I always try to be constructive, as you know, Sir Alec—I set out what I am trying to do in any debate to which I contribute in this House—and I ask for that in return.

The Independent Schools Council has proposed a simple and fair solution: introduce a VAT registration threshold for independent schools charging below the state-funding benchmark of £7,690 per pupil. If that could be considered, it would be a step in the right direction, as it would enable small independent faith schools to move forward in a positive fashion. The proposal is not a novel concept: the VAT system already includes thresholds to protect smaller entities from disproportionate burdens, and over half of UK businesses operate below the VAT registration threshold. Those are examples of this working, and of how it can be done. Again, I ask the Minister to refer this solution to the correct person in the correct Department to ensure that it can be done.

Only around 270 independent schools—roughly 10% of them—would qualify under the ISC’s proposal, but it would make a difference, as it would enable smaller schools to survive and come out on the other side. About 54,000 pupils would benefit, and the VAT revenue loss is estimated to be £32 million, which is just 2% of the projected £1.5 billion that the Department will get from putting VAT on independent school fees. However, if even a small percentage of those pupils transfer to the state sector, the cost to the Treasury rises sharply. That is a negative side to the policy. If there are no independent faith schools, pupils will have to go into the mainstream, and if they do that, the cost factor rises. If all those pupils were absorbed into the state sector, it would cost more than £415 million annually, even before accounting for infrastructure expansion.

In fiscal terms, the exemption is modest; in social terms, it is significant. This threshold would protect low-income families, preserve community-based education, maintain educational diversity and avoid putting unnecessary pressure on the state system. Those are some benefits that could be derived from moving towards the VAT registration threshold of £7,690 per pupil, under which a percentage of independent faith schools would qualify and 54,000 pupils would benefit. It would also not put the same pressure on the educational system as doing nothing would. In my opinion, and that of some of the experts and some of those in the Gallery, implementation would be straightforward. School fee information is publicly available, Ofsted already inspects fee policies and anti-avoidance safeguards are in place.

This is not about special treatment or asking for something that nobody else should get; it would enable people to have their faith, whether they be Christian, Muslim or Jewish, and to have their children educated in the school they wish, without it costing them the earth. It is about proportionality and fairness.

Ashley Fox Portrait Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)
- Hansard - -

I appreciate the solution that the hon. Gentleman is presenting for faith-based schools, but does he accept that any tax on education is wrong in principle? Would he support my party’s policy of reversing the burden of VAT for all independent schools?

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

This debate is quite clearly on VAT on independent faith-based schools, but I do support that principle and have voted accordingly in the Chamber, as has been recorded. I am today putting forward the case for independent faith-based schools and asking for them to be considered differently, but I accept what the hon. Gentleman says.

This issue is about proportionality, fairness and protecting vulnerable communities from unintended harm. The Government may not have accepted or understood the harm that this would cause, but there is a way of preventing it. I put that suggestion to the Minister. I believe that we can meet our fiscal objectives without undermining access to faith-based education for families of modest means.

Those are the people I know, the people from my constituency who send their children to independent, faith-based schools. They are the ones who have asked me to bring forward this debate. People here in the Public Gallery represent some 1,400 schools across the United Kingdom. We speak for people with a Christian faith, a Muslim faith and a Jewish faith—I make that quite clear. I urge the Minister and the Government to consider a targeted VAT threshold, to reflect economic realism—that is what we want to try to do—and social responsibility.

I am pleased that the Minister is in her place; this is the second time this week that she has come to Westminster Hall. I look to her respectfully and graciously to enable those conversations within the Cabinet, and to right the wrong that has been done.

--- Later in debate ---
Olivia Bailey Portrait Olivia Bailey
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman made his case well in his speech earlier, and he makes it again now. The Government have carefully considered the options that he has put forward today. I have heard all of his points and they have been noted by my officials.

Private schools have steadily increased average fees by 75% in real terms since 2000, and that has not affected pupil numbers. Fee increases can also reflect wider cost pressures beyond VAT and business rates.

The Government are closely monitoring the impact of VAT policy on the private school sector. We remain confident in the estimates made when this policy was introduced, which said that the number of private school closures was expected to remain relatively low and influenced by various factors, not just by the VAT policy. On average, 74 private schools, including independent special schools, have closed per year over the past 20 years. However, only 60 private schools closed in academic year 2024-25, which is the school year that the VAT changes were introduced. That means that school closures announced thus far remain firmly within historical patterns and sit comfortably within our expectations. Indeed, even after the VAT policy came into effect, private schools continued to open in England. In the same time period—between 1 September 2024 and 31 August 2025—106 private schools registered and opened.

We are confident that the state sector can accommodate any additional pupils, including any pupils transferring from private state schools.

Ashley Fox Portrait Sir Ashley Fox
- Hansard - -

The justification for this tax given in the Labour party manifesto was to raise revenue to employ more teachers in the state sector, yet we now know that in November 2025, there were 1,400 fewer teachers than 12 months previously. Can the Minister tell us where the money has gone?

Olivia Bailey Portrait Olivia Bailey
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I will. I am just coming on to that, if you will bear with me. I am grateful for that. [Interruption.] Did I do something wrong, Sir Alec? I apologise.

SEND Provision: Somerset

Ashley Fox Excerpts
Tuesday 3rd September 2024

(1 year, 6 months ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.

Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Sarah Dyke Portrait Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I beg to move,

That this House has considered SEND services in Somerset.

I do apologise for being late, Mr Efford. I am slightly out of breath, but it is an honour to serve under you in the Chair. Before I start, I draw my fellow Members’ attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as a sitting Somerset councillor.

The current special educational needs and disabilities system is broken. Those with experience all report that it is far too adversarial, pitting families against councils and schools. The recent Isos Partnership report, produced in partnership with the County Councils Network and the Local Government Association, found that all stakeholders are acting reasonably, but are being failed by the system.

It is important to set out why the system is broken and the challenges that it faces. More children are being identified as having SEND—special educational needs and disabilities—than ever before. In January 2022, 14,000 children in Somerset were identified as having SEND; 4,000 of those children had education, health and care plans and the other 10,000 had some form of SEND support. Somerset is far from unique; SEND numbers have risen nationally. Since reforms to the system under the Children and Families Act 2014, the number of EHCPs has risen by 140%. More children have also had their needs left unmet in mainstream educational settings, a fact that places more emphasis on specialist schools.

Between 2014-15 and 2023-24, there has been a 60% increase in SEND placements in state-funded schools. Somerset Council officials have told me that the linchpin for the system failing has been the inability of mainstream education to cope with the sheer increase in demand within such a short time. The reality is that under the previous Conservative Government, schools and councils faced a huge real-terms cut in funding, which has undoubtedly had a negative impact on the provision that mainstream schools can provide.

The reliance on independent specialist schools has also increased pressure on councils. Somerset Council funding for children with EHCPs in mainstream settings is about £12 million a year and, despite having a quarter as many children in independent schools, the cost is more than double and, in addition, costs the council over £30 million per year. The difference in expenditure between children with EHCPs in independent schools and those in state-funded schools is vast. A typical child assessed as band 3 in a mainstream school will get £13,359 of total funding, whereas an independent school place can cost up to £100,000, plus £50,000 in transport costs. That is more than 10 times what a child with similar needs in a mainstream school is getting.

That brings me on to another element of failure. Even though the Government are investing more than ever in SEND provision, it is still significantly less than the actual spend by local authorities. Government funding in the high needs block allocation has risen from £4.8 billion in 2014-15 to £9.2 billion in 2024-25, but analysis has shown that the actual figure for high needs spending by local authorities is £890 million more in 2023-24 and could rise to more than £1 billion over the next two years. Somerset Council’s high needs forecast was evaluated by Newton Europe, which concluded that by 2027-28 the council would be carrying a formal deficit of £160 million. The statutory override on the debts means that they are kept off the books, but half of council leaders surveyed recently said that they would be insolvent in three years if that was removed.

The funding is also unequal across the country, leading to a postcode lottery in provision. Somerset Council is part of the f40 group, which includes the poorest funded councils in the country. Somerset will receive less than £8,000 gross dedicated grant funding per mainstream pupil in 2024-25—more than £5,000 less than the best-funded local authority in England, illustrating a massive disparity.

Rural areas such as Somerset also face huge costs in home to school transport due to the sheer size of the county. The average cost to Somerset Council of transport for a child with SEND is £10,000 per year, while some individual transport arrangements cost the council over £60,000 a year. Despite that investment and support, the outcomes for children with SEND have failed to improve over the last decade since the reforms in 2014.

I am inundated with casework from desperate parents who are at breaking point over their child’s being unable to receive the education they deserve. One parent from Wincanton told me that their bright, intelligent child deserves to be cared for rather than ignored by the system following what was a harrowing experience. Even though their child has gone through the SEND system and has a placement in a specialist school, their needs are still not being met properly. To summarise, there is more demand than ever before and the system is costing more than ever before, but it is failing to deliver for some of the country’s most vulnerable children.

I turn my attention now to a consequence of the failure of SEND services in Somerset. About 2,000 children in Somerset receive a home education. Although the council believes some of the children are receiving a home education for an entirely legitimate reason, many are being forced into home schooling as the child could not cope in school. Issues arising from a forced home education are twofold.

When a child moves to receive education at a place other than a school, they are automatically deleted from the school roll, resulting in the council’s being unable to receive the dedicated grant funding for that child. Somerset Council estimates that that is costing the education system between £8 million and £10 million a year. It is almost impossible to retrieve that money to create space for the child in the system once they are off-rolled. That then creates a one-way exit from the system unless an EHCP is granted for the child at some point in the future. In any case, it would be a very slow and arduous process, because we know that nearly half of EHCPs take longer than the 20-week statutory period to be granted.

The tribunal system is far too traumatic and stressful for parents. While 98% of tribunal cases find in the parents’ favour, that does not change the reality that councils are struggling to provide sufficient and appropriate services. For parents who do not know how to navigate the tribunal process, it can be even more turbulent for them and their child. Somerset is struggling with the issue more than many other places across the country.

Somerset has the third-highest rate of school exclusions and the second highest rate of suspensions in England for children with SEND. Those exclusions and suspensions are primarily for persistent disruptive behaviour. Even where a child has not been identified with SEND, it has often subsequently been discovered that there is an undiagnosed need. That leaves them excluded from the system and fighting for a diagnosis and an EHCP in order to get back to school, where they should be, and receive the education that they deserve.

It is not surprising to learn that there is also a detrimental impact on parents. There are around 60,000 economically inactive adults in Somerset, and the council has reason to believe that at least some of those people have been forced to give up work because they care for their child at home. We can often forget the important childcare aspect of education. The impact of a breakdown in a child’s education can have a wide range of consequences; sadly, in some cases, it can lead to a family breakdown. We need to undertake work on a national level to get to grips with the scale of the problem. I know the Government are proposing a register of children not in school, to understand the issues better, but we still need to create better routes to get children back into school.

Somerset council is supporting efforts to bring in a more flexible education system that would work to support children at home and to rebuild their ability to enter the system, but they need national support.

Ashley Fox Portrait Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)
- Hansard - -

I thank the hon. Lady for bringing the debate to Westminster Hall. I have only been the Member for Bridgwater for two months and already have many letters from parents concerned about the system in Somerset for SEND. It is clear that the system is too adversarial and not working correctly. I support her plea for Somerset to be more generously funded—not more than others, but brought up to the average of the country.

Clive Efford Portrait Clive Efford (in the Chair)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Is this an intervention on the hon. Member or a speech?

Ashley Fox Portrait Sir Ashley Fox
- Hansard - -

Does the hon. Lady agree that the most pressing problem is delays in the system, particularly in making decisions, in creating an EHC plan and in assessing what the contents of that plan would be?

Sarah Dyke Portrait Sarah Dyke
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman is correct. We know that, as I have already said, there are significant delays in children receiving their EHCP, so I call on the Government to speed up that process. As I have said, the most important thing is for our children to receive the education they deserve. We need to get them in school, where they should be, to have the best possible education.

Somerset council’s flexible approach involves taking more compassionate actions to put children’s needs at the forefront and to support them in their journey back into mainstream education. The Liberal Democrats want to support that work by creating a national body for SEND that would fund support for those with the very highest needs. A national body would support services to identify where early interventions are needed. That would lower future costs, since needs are so often exacerbated due to inaction.

We must look at other solutions and reforms that could make the system more efficient. Somerset council is utilising the funding it has and equalising funding between mainstream and specialist schools, but currently mainstream schools get a third less money than specialist schools. Somerset council believes that by spending the money in a smarter way, it can improve mainstream provision and create better opportunities for children. The new Government have pledged to take a community approach to SEND, and I await further details of what that will look like.

Aside from the children’s wellbeing Bill, there was little mention of SEND in the King’s Speech. The Government pledged to put children at the heart of education and children’s services with that Bill, but to make real change we must put early interventions in place and create support within the mainstream system to reduce costs and the demand for specialist schools.

Part of the solution is to give local authorities with responsibility for education the powers and resources to act as strategic education authorities for their area, including responsibility for places planning, exclusions, administering admissions and SEND functions. The importance of those issues cannot be overstated as evidenced by the three debates on SEND happening in this place this week alone.

I have spoken about issues specific to Somerset, but the crisis affects children and families across the country. We simply cannot let it go on any longer. Delays in action and reform will cost those within the SEND system and will increase the cost to the public purse, as the finances needed to fix the system just carry on increasing over time. I would like to hear more details from the Minister on how the Government will resolve the issues embedded in the system and support the nation’s children to secure the education that they deserve.