Education

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Wednesday 26th March 2025 Written Corrections

The following extract is from Second Reading of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Bill [Lords] on 25 February 2025.

[Bridget Phillipson]

… This Bill will bring together the many disparate parts of a very fragmented system, which employers, particularly smaller employers, often find hard to navigate the right way through, and are not always clear about the best training and qualification routes in order to find the people that they need. Also, the changes we have made to English and maths in particular will support employers to create 10,000 additional apprenticeships every single year.

[Official Report, 25 February 2025; Vol. 762, c. 680.]

Written correction submitted by the Secretary of State for Education, the right hon. Member for Houghton and Sunderland South (Bridget Phillipson):

[Bridget Phillipson]

… This Bill will bring together the many disparate parts of a very fragmented system, which employers, particularly smaller employers, often find hard to navigate the right way through, and are not always clear about the best training and qualification routes in order to find the people that they need. Also, the changes we have made to English and maths in particular will support employers to unlock 10,000 additional apprenticeship completions every single year.

Higher Education: Protecting Public Money

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Tuesday 25th March 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

Today I am setting out the actions this Government are taking to tackle concerning evidence of abuse of public money associated with the franchised higher education system which we inherited.

Franchising, where one higher education provider subcontracts provision to a delivery partner, grew significantly under the previous Government, but most franchised providers were not placed under the direct oversight of the regulator—the Office for Students. When done well, franchised higher education can be an important driver of inclusion, but against a backdrop of growing financial instability within higher education, for some institutions, it is apparent that franchising became less about expanding access and more about maximising income.

In 2023 and 2024, the Government Internal Audit Agency, the National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee all raised concerns about abuse, unethical behaviour and fraud. Without the necessary guardrails, or a funding settlement that put universities on a sound financial footing, in some institutions the system has become a breeding ground for abuse, unethical behaviour and fraud.

Earlier this month, I was made aware that there is a disproportionately large number of Romanian students settled in the UK who receive student funding from the Student Loans Company.

Investigative work undertaken by the Student Loans Company suggests organised exploitation both of Romanian students and of the UK taxpayer.

Under this Government, this abuse will end. The Department for Education and the Office for Students already have a programme of investigations under way related to franchised provision. Where these investigations have found abuse of the student finance system there will be serious consequences. I have now also asked the Public Sector Fraud Authority to tackle this threat and take forward this work across Government.

We will also take immediate action on the use of agents to recruit students. The Government can see no legitimate role for domestic agents in the recruitment of UK students. We are taking urgent steps to prevent any further abuse of the system.

Since taking office in July, the Government have moved at pace to tackle the many inherited challenges in the higher education sector, which this Government believe should be treated as a public good, not a political battleground. In November, I set out changes to the level of tuition fees and maintenance, for the first time in seven years, and set out the five principles for broader reform of the sector which underpin the approach this Government will take. We have already reformed the Office for Students, accepting the report of Sir David Behan and bringing new leadership and a tighter focus.

I have written to Edward Peck, the incoming chair, to ask him to make protection of public money a top priority. To support this, I will bring forward legislation at the next available opportunity to give the Office for Students stronger powers to act more quickly and effectively to protect public money.

In January the Department launched a consultation on franchised higher education. The proposals would bring much closer regulatory scrutiny of the largest franchised providers—the ones in which there has been significant growth in recent years—bringing them under direct oversight by the Office for Students. The Office for Students is also consulting to strengthen its conditions of registration, to stop providers with weak governance arrangements from being able to register in the first place. We have asked it also to urgently strengthen the requirements on the providers who subcontract provision. Together, if implemented, these proposals would impose new and significant controls on franchising.

Higher education providers are engines of growth and drivers of opportunity, but these issues threaten the integrity of the sector. With the regulator, we will set the rules, we will enforce them and we will protect public money. However, ultimately universities must take ownership of these issues for themselves and we will look to them to take responsibility to ensure abuse like this is brought to an end. There can be no excuse for the abuse of public money, and under this Government there will be no hiding place for those who perpetrate such abuse.

[HCWS547]

School Funding: National Insurance Contributions Grant and Pupil Premium

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Tuesday 18th March 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

Today the Department for Education has confirmed national insurance contributions grant funding rates and schools’ pupil premium funding rates for the financial year 2025-26.

The NICs grant will provide schools, colleges, and high-needs settings with over £1 billion to support them with the increases to employer national insurance contributions from April 2025, broken down as set out in the table below.

Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Bill [Lords]

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 25th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

We are a country of incredible talent and enterprise; a country of industry and invention. Our universities lead the world. Our colleges deliver excellence to hundreds of thousands up and down the country. British companies founded on great ideas export their products across the globe. Our strengths range from research to manufacturing and from professional services to creative industries, yet there remains a wide and growing gap between where we are now and what I know our great country is capable of, because, despite our many strengths, there are skills missing from our workforce.

There are skills missed by people who want to get on in life, get better training to land that great job and earn a decent living; skills missed by our employers, with businesses, hospitals, labs and factories held back; skills missed by so many of our communities, with towns and cities left behind as industry has moved on; and skills missed by our country. Those skills are vital to the security and growth that this Labour Government are so determined to deliver.

Our latest data shows us that half a million vacancies sit empty simply because employers struggle to find the right staff with the right skills: the most since we started collecting the data in 2011. That is half a million jobs not filled, half a million careers not boosted and half a million opportunities not taken—a tragic waste that this country simply cannot afford. But I am sorry to say that this is not surprising. We have fallen behind our neighbours on higher technical qualifications—the ones that sit just below degree level, but which can lead to well-paid, fulfilling careers for software developers, civil engineering technicians or construction site supervisors.

Over 90% of employers value basic digital skills in their job candidates, but more than 7 million adults lack them. Our skills gaps deal our people and our country a double blow. They hold back the economic growth we need to invest in our public services and drive national prosperity, and they hold back the ambitions of working people who deserve the chance not just to get by but to get on. They deny them the opportunity, the power and the freedom to choose the life they want to live.

[Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)]

Would the Secretary of State agree that one of the difficulties is that employers cannot spend the money from the apprenticeship levy easily, and that too much of that money is retained by the Treasury? Will she undertake to speak to the Chancellor to see whether she could make it easier for employers to spend that money on training?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the Chancellor is as committed as I am to ensuring that we have the right skills within the economy, because without them we will not be able to deliver the economic growth that is the No. 1 mission of this Labour Government. But we are committed to reforming the failing apprenticeship levy, reforming the system and converting it into a growth and skills levy with more flexibility for employers. As a first step, this will include shorter-duration and foundation apprenticeships in targeted sectors, making sure that we are working more effectively with employers in order for our economy to grow.

[Sir John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings) (Con)]

I welcome the commitment to skills that the Secretary of State is articulating, but will she recognise that too often the advice given to young people, particularly from schools, is to pursue an academic career—I use the word “academic” in the loosest possible sense—rather than to engage in practical learning? That means that while the shortages she describes are profound, there are also many people who are graduates in non-graduate jobs owing a lot of money and with pretty useless degrees.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I was almost on the point of saying that I agreed with much of what the right hon. Gentleman had to say, but unfortunately he went and ruined it at the end with that comment about the value of university education and of having the chance to gain a degree. Where I do share common cause with him is that I want to make sure that all young people have a range of pathways available to them, including fantastic technical training routes, including through apprenticeships, but I also want to make sure that young people with talent and ability are able to take up a university course if that is the right path and the right choice for them.

As we were recently celebrating National Apprenticeship Week, I took the opportunity to see across the country some of the fantastic routes that are available in areas such as construction and nuclear, with really wonderful job opportunities and careers where young people are able to make fantastic progress.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I had the opportunity to visit Harlow College during National Apprenticeship Week, and I really agree with the points that my right hon. Friend is making. Does she agree that if we are to achieve the new homes targets that we really want to achieve and get people off the streets and into those homes, we need to train those apprentices now and that Skills England can be part of that future?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree with my hon. Friend, and I know how much he champions, in his constituency and in the House, opportunities for young people to have the chance to take on new skills, including through apprenticeship routes. Where it comes to construction, he is right to say that there are fantastic opportunities out there. It was heartening, during some of my visits during National Apprenticeship Week, to see the fantastic contribution that women play in construction, breaking down some of the stereotypes that exist about the right opportunities, and to meet some amazing engineering apprentices and bricklaying apprentices. Those women are really trailblazing in an industry that is often very male-dominated.

[Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)]

On the subject of construction, does my right hon. Friend agree that a huge amount of the construction industry is made up of small employers and that one of the biggest failings of the apprenticeship levy approach has been that small and medium-sized enterprises have been shut out? We have had a 50% reduction in the number of SMEs offering apprenticeships since the introduction of the levy. How will she increase the number of SMEs that are able to offer apprenticeships? If the major employers are the ones that have all the budget, how do we ensure that we increase the number of SME apprenticeships?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend has a long-standing interest in this area and has consistently raised not only the challenges faced by small businesses but the opportunities to create more apprenticeship starts and more training routes for people across our country. One of the changes that we set out during National Apprenticeship Week was to the maths and English requirements for adult apprentices, which will make a big difference to employers large and small and was welcomed by business, but he is right to say that much more is needed to help smaller employers and small contractors to take on apprentices. That is the work that Skills England will drive forward and that is why this Bill is such a crucial development.

The skills gaps that we face in our country deny people the opportunity, the power and the freedom to choose the life that they want to live. But it is not just today that we count the cost; those gaps limit our power to shape the careers, the economy and the society of tomorrow as well. Only with the right skills can people take control of their future, and only with the right skills system can we drive the growth that this country needs. It is time this country took skills seriously again: no longer an afterthought, but now at the centre of change; no longer a nice to have, but now a driving force for opportunity; no longer neglected, but now a national strength.

There is much to celebrate. Plenty of colleges go above and beyond, plenty of employers are ready to contribute and plenty of people are eager to upskill, but our system needs reform. Too many people have been sidelined and left without the skills to seize opportunity. One in eight young people are not in employment, education or training. We can, and we must, do more to break down the barriers to learning that too many people still face. We need a system that is firing on all cylinders.

[Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

The figure in Stoke-on-Trent is even more stark, with 22% of young people not in education, employment or training. We have a wonderful ecosystem of colleges, with Stoke sixth form college, Stoke-on-Trent college and the University of Staffordshire, but as my hon. Friend the Member for Chesterfield (Mr Perkins) said, we also have small and medium-sized organisations. Can the Secretary of State set out how this Bill will help an organisation such as the Spark Group, run by Dan Canavan, to tap into opportunities in order to spread his ability to help those young people into well-paid jobs in my community?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend names a fantastic business in his constituency and the contribution that it makes. There is a lot more that we need to do to support smaller employers to be in a stronger position to benefit from apprenticeships.

This Bill will bring together the many disparate parts of a very fragmented system, which employers, particularly smaller employers, often find hard to navigate the right way through, and are not always clear about the best training and qualification routes in order to find the people that they need. Also, the changes we have made to English and maths in particular will support employers to create 10,000 additional apprenticeships every single year. This was a call that we heard loud and clear from employers, and it is a simple, straightforward change that will open up opportunities for people across our country. They will still have the English and maths standards as part of their apprenticeship, but they will no longer be held back by some of the red tape that has denied them the chance to get on in life.

The skills system that we have right now is too fragmented, too confusing and too tangled up across too many organisations. There is no single source of truth, no single organisation able to zoom out and see the big problems and no single authority able to bring the sector together to solve them. The result is a system that amounts to less than the sum of its parts. For young people, it can be hard to know where the opportunities lie. Adults looking to upskill or reskill and working people hoping for a fresh start are too often met with confusion, not clarity. They are presented with a muddling mix of options when they need clear pathways to great careers.

It is no better for employers. They tell us that the system is difficult to navigate and slow to respond. They tell us that they are too often shut out of course design and that their voices are too often not heard. The result is frustration. Learners and employers are frustrated, and they are right to be frustrated. Many businesses do a good job of investing in the skills of their workforce, but others simply are not spending enough.

Investment is at its lowest since 2011 at just half the EU average. We must empower businesses to reverse the trend by investing in their employees, and for that, we need to move forward. There will always remain a strong and galvanising role for competition, but where it is harmful, adds complexity, duplicates efforts or twists incentives, we will balance it with supportive co-ordination to ensure that all parts of the system are pulling in the right direction.

Here is our vision and the change we need. From sidelined to supported, we need a system that helps everyone so that businesses can secure the skilled workforce they need. From fragmented to coherent, we need a system defined by clear and powerful pathways to success and towards effective co-ordination. We also need a system of partnership with everyone pulling together towards the same goals. That is the change that Skills England will oversee.

This Labour Government are a mission-led Government with a plan for change, and skills are essential to Labour’s missions to drive economic growth and break down the barriers to opportunity. In fact, skills go way beyond that. Skills training contributes across our society, and great skills training driven by Skills England, supported by my Department, guided by the wisdom of colleges, universities, businesses, mayors and trade unions, and directed by national priorities and local communities is the skills system we need. It is a system that will drive forward all our missions. It will help us fix our NHS, create clean energy and deliver safer streets.

Skills are the fuel that will drive a decade of national renewal, which is vital for our plan for change. That is why earlier this month we unveiled our plans to help thousands more apprentices to qualify every year. That means more people with the right skills in high-demand sectors from social care to construction and beyond. We have listened to what businesses have told us. We will shorten the minimum length of apprenticeships and put employers in charge of decisions on English and maths requirements for adults.

Last November, the Government announced £140 million of investment in homebuilding skills hubs. Once fully up to speed, the hubs will deliver more than 5,000 fast-track apprenticeships a year, helping to build the extra homes that the people of this country desperately need. We are driving change for our skills system, and Skills England is leading the charge. It will assess the skills needed on the ground regionally and nationally now and in the years to come. Where skills evolve rapidly and where new and exciting technologies are accelerating from AI to clean energy, Skills England will be ready to give employers the fast and flexible support they need.

[Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)]

I represent a coastal community. Coastal communities have been forgotten over the past 14 years almost as much as the skills agenda. In my constituency, Bournemouth and Poole college led by Phil Sayles, who is doing incredible work, is about to open the green energy construction campus in April, which will enable solar, heat pump and rainwater capture skills to be taught to apprentices and trainees. Will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating the college, and does she agree that colleges like that one are critical to achieving clean power by 2030?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am delighted to hear my hon. Friend’s experience from Bournemouth. Our colleges are a crucial part of how we ensure that we have the skills we need in our economy, but also how we will drive forward our agenda on clean energy. He is also right to identify the enormous opportunities for jobs, growth and training, as well as, crucially, the imperative of ensuring that we have stability and security in our energy supply, so that never again are we so exposed to the fluctuations of energy markets that happened because of the invasion of Ukraine.

[Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)]

I want to amplify the valuable skills that our colleges are teaching in renewable technologies. I recently visited South Thames college in Wandsworth, where I saw the labs it has set up to teach the installation of heat pumps and other renewable technologies. The main challenge that the college faces is finding staff to teach the classes and to take on the apprentices and all the other learners. What support will the Government give to colleges to ensure that they can recruit experienced individuals to pass on those skills to the apprentices, so that we can provide the workforces that we dearly need?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The hon. Gentleman is right about the challenges across the further education sector. Sadly, we know those challenges all too well after 14 years of failure under the Conservatives. We recognise the enormous opportunity that comes from investing in our fantastic colleges. That is why at the Budget we announced an extra £300 million of additional revenue for further education and £300 million of new capital investment. That also builds on our investment to extend targeted retention incentive payments of up to £6,000 after tax to eligible early career FE teachers in key subject areas. Our FE sector will have a crucial role to play in our mission for growth and opportunity, and he is right to draw attention to that.

Skills England will be ready to give employers the fast and flexible support they need. While updates to courses in the past have been sluggish and left behind by new technology, the Bill will help us keep up with the pace of change. Skills England will draw on high-quality data. It will design courses that are demand-led and shaped from the ground up by employers. Employers should be in no doubt that they will have a critical role in course design and delivery. That is why I have appointed Phil Smith to chair Skills England. Phil brings a wealth of business expertise from his two decades leading Cisco and will ensure that employers are at the heart of Skills England. I have appointed Sir David Bell as vice-chair, drawing on his wealth of experience across education and Whitehall. I have also appointed Tessa Griffiths and Sarah Maclean as chief executive on a job-share basis, with Gemma Marsh as deputy chief executive. They will provide strong, independent leadership to move the skills system forward. Skills England will be held accountable by an independent board, and the Bill requires a report to be published and laid before Parliament, setting out the impact on technical education and apprenticeships of the exercise of the functions in the measure.

The clear relationship between the Department and Skills England is governed by a public framework document, which will be published for all to see. It will be a core constitutional document produced in line with guidance from the Treasury, making clear the different roles of my Department and Skills England. Skills England will reach across the country. It will not be trapped in Whitehall but spread to every town and city, because growth and employment must benefit every part of the country, not just where it is easy to drive growth. That means being ambitious, especially in areas that have been overlooked for decades, because talent and aspiration are no less present in those places.

Skills England will drive co-ordinated action to meet regional and national skills needs at all levels and in all places. It will work closely with mayoral strategic authorities and local and regional organisations, and it will connect with counterparts in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Skills England will simplify the system by combining functions within one powerful body and pulling together the disparate strands of Departments, local leaders, colleges, universities and training providers and weaving them into a coherent offer for businesses and learners alike.

To see why the skills revolution is so important for growth and why we must take skills seriously again, we should look no further than the UK’s stalling productivity over the last decade and a half, dragging down our economy and cutting off hopes of higher incomes for workers. The skills system is central because, despite all its problems, the expansion of workforce skills drove a third of average annual productivity growth between 2001 and 2019. Here we have a chance. Here we see what is at stake. If we get this right by investing in our people and backing Skills England, we can drive productivity and get economic growth back on track. At the same time, we can give working people power and choice because that is what good skills can offer: the chance for them to take control of their careers and take advantage of the opportunities that our economy will create. That is why Skills England will work to support the forthcoming industrial strategy unveiled by the Chancellor last November. The next phase of its work will provide further evidence on the strategy’s eight growth-driving sectors: advanced manufacturing, clean energy, the creative industries, defence, digital, financial services, life sciences, and professional and business services. Added to those are two more: construction and healthcare.

Skills England will work closely with the Industrial Strategy Council, which will monitor the strategy’s progress against clear objectives.

[Mr Perkins]

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for giving way again. She is speaking incredibly powerfully and passionately about the role of Skills England, and I share her commitment and excitement about it, but as she knows, this IfATE Bill abolishes IfATE rather than creating Skills England. There were those who believed that putting Skills England on a statutory footing as an independent body, rather than keeping it in the Department, might have been the way to go. Will she explain to the House why she has taken this approach, and why she believes that Skills England will, as a body in her Department rather than as a truly independent body, have the strength and respect in the sector that it so badly needs?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I will set out the reason primarily and then say a little about the way in which Skills England will operate. First, the need to do it in this way is one of time and speed. As I hope I have set out to the House, the need to act is urgent; we must get on with this and ensure that we tackle the chronic skills shortages right across our country—there is no time to waste. The Government are determined to drive opportunity and growth in every corner of our country. Further delays to that will hold back not just growth but opportunities.

When it comes to the function of Skills England and how it will operate, it will be an Executive agency of the Department for Education. It will have the independence that it needs to perform its role effectively, with a robust governance and accountability framework and a chair who brings an enormous wealth of experience from business. A strong, independent board, chaired by Phil Smith, will balance operational independence with proximity to Government. It will operate in the same way that many Executive agencies, such as the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, already operate.

As with any new arm’s length body, in the next 18 to 24 months we will review how Skills England is functioning, to consider whether it still exists within the best model. [Interruption.] That is entirely in keeping with the way in which arm’s length bodies are routinely considered by the Government. I am surprised that Conservative Members are surprised, because that is simply how these things are done, as they know all too well. If they are content to allow drift and delay, they will hold back opportunity for people across our country; they will hold back the demand that businesses rightly lay at our door to get on with the job of creating the conditions in which they can deliver more apprenticeship starts, more opportunities, and more chances to learn and upskill.

Skills England will work closely with the Industrial Strategy Council, which will monitor the strategy’s progress against clear objectives. The Skills England chair will have a permanent seat on the council—that really matters. By 2035 there will be at least 1.4 million new jobs. Our clean energy mission will rely on talented people with the expertise to power our greener future. The pace of technological change, including artificial intelligence, is accelerating, and it brings huge opportunities for our economy. However, to seize those opportunities, firms need a ready supply of people with the right skills. We will nurture home-grown talent in all regions so that people have the skills they need for those exciting jobs of the future.

Skills England will work with the Migration Advisory Committee to ensure that training in England accounts for the overall need of the labour market and to reduce the reliance of some sectors on labour from abroad.

[Gareth Snell]

I thank the Secretary of State for being so generous with her time. I absolutely support her ambition of ensuring that we have the skills for the jobs of the future. Will she say a little about how Skills England will support foundational manufacturing industries, such as ceramics in Stoke-on-Trent, which will not be prioritised in the industrial strategy but still have a lot to offer our economy and are crying out for skills from local people? If we can get that right, we can grow our own economy, and that is true levelling up in my opinion.

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend always champions the ceramics industry in his constituency. We have had many conversations on that topic, and he is absolutely right to put it into context. Skills England will benefit the ceramics industry and his constituents because we will be able to move much more rapidly to make changes to qualifications and training requirements in order to meet the needs of employers, with further flexibility, shorter courses, and foundation apprenticeships for young people for the chance to get on, including in long-standing traditional industries as well as in future jobs and opportunities.

The Bill is a crucial leap forward, bringing the different parts of the skills system closer together, and it paves the way for Skills England. It transfers the current functions of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education to the Secretary of State, not to exercise power from Westminster, but to empower the expert leadership of Skills England to drive the change we need. Bringing those functions to Skills England will place the content and design of technical qualifications at the heart of our skills system, where they belong.

Skills England has existed in shadow form since Labour took power and began the work of change in July. It set out its first “state of the nation” report into skills gaps in our economy in September. Skills England is moving ahead. The leadership is in place, and by laying the groundwork for a swift transition to Skills England, we are moving a step closer towards a joined-up skills system.

At its heart, this Bill is about growth and opportunity—growth for our economy, and opportunity for our people—and there is no time to waste. We need action, not delay. The people of this country need better jobs, higher wages and brighter futures; no more vacancies unfilled due to a lack of skills, no more chances missed and no more growth lost. We need change now, not change pushed back to some foggy future, so we are pushing ahead.

This is legislation that builds on what has come before but demands more—more cohesion, more dynamism and more ambition. That is how we break down the barriers to opportunity, that is how we fire up the engines of economic growth, and that is how we deliver the future that this country deserves—the bright hope that our best days lie ahead of us. I commend this Bill to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

Breakfast Clubs: Early Adopters

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Monday 24th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

With permission, I will make a statement updating the House on the Government’s work to deliver free breakfast clubs and give every child the best start in life. This is a Government who act on their principles, deliver on their promises and drive the change that the country needs—change that is felt in our villages, towns and cities; change that will help families with the cost of living; and change that lifts the life chances of our children across the country. Change begins and the biggest difference can be made during those early years of life, and on into primary school, when the possibilities still stretch out.

Our action is urgent. Far too many children growing up in this country are held back by their background and denied the opportunity to go on to live happy and healthy lives, with the bad luck of a tough start weighing down their life chances. I will not stand by while those children are let down, because I believe that background should not mean destiny. Every single child deserves the very best start in life. To achieve and thrive at school is the right of all children.

Our manifesto outlined the action a Labour Government would take, and now, not yet eight months on from the election, we are delivering change in early years, change in primary schools and change in our country. I am delighted to update the House today that I have confirmed more than 750 schools as early adopters of our free breakfast club scheme. That is a promise made, and a promise kept. I will always act to protect working families’ livelihoods for children and their parents. It is for them that we are working tirelessly to deliver change, and it is for them that we will introduce free breakfast clubs in every primary school in this country. That is what we said we would do in our manifesto, and it is exactly what we are doing now.

Evidence shows why this matters so much. When schools introduce breakfast clubs, behaviour improves, attendance increases and attainment grows. That is no surprise when we are giving children the gift of a calm, welcoming start to the day, filled with friends, fun and food. It is the foundation for success that every child needs. This is about parents as well as children. Our new breakfast clubs will save families up to £450 a year, putting money directly back into parents’ pockets. That is why we are moving ahead with such energy and urgency, for children and for parents.

We are working to cement the clubs in legislation through the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Thousands of schools have applied to take part—an indication of overwhelming demand, and a spur to act. From this April, free breakfast clubs will begin to reach more than 180,000 children, and 70,000 pupils from schools in the most deprived parts of the country will be able to take part. Our early adopter schools are drawn from all kinds of places: cities and villages, north and south, east and west, affluent areas and more disadvantaged communities, big schools and smaller schools, mainstream schools and special schools for children with special educational needs and disabilities. They include schools that have had a club before and those that have not; schools in which parents have had to pay for breakfast clubs in the past; and schools in which places are limited. That variety is key. It gives us a representative sample, so we can see what works, when, where, why and how, guided by the best evidence. That is how we will maximise the impact of the full roll-out, bringing the benefits to children across the entire country.

We are taking a new approach—the challenges we face demand it. Breakfast clubs are one part, but we are going further and delivering more change for children. We are a mission-led Government, bringing meaningful change that is felt in our towns, our cities, and our communities, and I am proud to be leading our mission across Government to break down the barriers to opportunity. In December the Prime Minister unveiled our plan for change, and within that plan lies a vital milestone: a record proportion of children starting school, ready to learn. That is crucial to closing the opportunity gap; all children arriving at school, ready to achieve and to thrive gets right to the heart of what it means to have the very best start in life.

I believe that delivering the best start in life is about families—parents and children. Breakfast clubs are one piece of the puzzle, but our action starts earlier in life, with great early education and childcare. It is something that I have spent many years in this House fighting for, but that our childcare system has denied families. There are areas underserved with childcare places yet overwhelmed with demand; additional hours are offered nationally, but they are unavailable to families locally. The Opposition’s failure to keep their promises is the reason their party suffered such an emphatic defeat at the last election. A promise made but not acted on is not a promise at all, and a pledge without a plan to deliver is meaningless. That is why this Government are committed to delivering the entitlements that parents were promised before the last election. As a result of this Government’s hard work in making that pledge a reality, families can now access 15 hours of Government-funded childcare a week from when their child is nine months old. From September, that will increase to 30 hours a week, matching the offer for three and four-year-olds.

This Government have matched the pledge with a plan—a promise now backed by funding. In the next financial year alone, we will invest more than £8 billion in early years entitlements, an increase of more than £2 billion. On top of that is a new £75 million expansion grant to support the sector to provide the extra places and staff needed. We will use those 30 hours a week to combine childcare with great early education, and to give children the very best start in life. I want to double down on support for those children who need it most, in the areas that need it most. That is why I introduced the biggest ever uplift to the early years pupil premium. Childcare delivers for parents too. Just like breakfast clubs, the entitlements give parents power, choice and freedom over their lives, enabling them to go back to work if that is what they want to do—work choices for parents; life chances for children. These are the steps we are taking and the promises we are keeping to support families.

I am determined to see the change through, but it is not a shot in the dark. The value of giving children the best start in life, and the power of spreading breakfast clubs across the country, is as clear as day and there for all to see if we know where to look. On the northern edge of St Helens sits Carr Mill primary school. Children at Carr Mill can come in before the school day starts and eat breakfast with their friends in the school bistro. When they reach year 5, they are invited to become bistro leaders. Those young leaders help their peers to get a good breakfast, but they also learn about responsibility, caring for their classmates, and what it means to be part of a community. Parents see the change in their children, who are more confident and eager to go to school in the morning, and the younger ones look up to the bistro leaders.

It is not just the breakfast; it is the club too—helping children to settle, showing them that they belong in school, getting them ready to learn, and shaping not just the students of today but the citizens of tomorrow. It sets children up for success in school and in life, because that wider goal we are chasing of giving every child the best start in life means giving them the best start to their school day, each and every day, week after week, year after year. That is how we are breaking the link between background and success, and how we are delivering the change that parents voted for. That is how we are driving the change that the children of this country deserve. I commend this statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Neil O’Brien (Harborough, Oadby and Wigston) (Con)]

I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of the statement. The previous Government substantially expanded access to breakfast clubs in primary and secondary schools, and crated the holiday activities and food programme. The national school breakfast programme has been running since 2018, and 85% of schools now have a breakfast club, with one in eight having a taxpayer-funded breakfast club. In March 2023, the previous Government announced £289 million for the national wraparound childcare funding programme, some of which is being used to fund breakfast clubs. That was part of a much wider expansion of free childcare that saw spending on entitlement to free childcare more than double in real terms between 2010 and 2024.

I was struck by the comments made by Mark Russell from the Children’s Society during the evidence sessions for the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Given the resource constraints, he said taxpayer money should be focused on rolling out free breakfasts to a greater number of deprived secondary schools, rather than providing a universal offer in primary schools. He said:

“I would like to see secondary school children helped, and if the pot is limited, I would probably step back from universality and provide for those most in need.”––[Official Report, Children's Wellbeing and Schools Public Bill Committee, 21 January 2025; c. 55, Q122.]

With that in mind, I want to draw attention to the uncertainty created by the Government’s refusal to commit to funding the existing free breakfast provision in secondary schools beyond next year, and likewise the holiday activities and food programme. A number of charities have called for Ministers to guarantee that funding beyond next year, and I join them in asking the Secretary of State to give that guarantee. Getting rid of the existing free breakfasts would mean a cut in provision for deprived children at secondary schools, so will the Secretary of State guarantee to continue them?

According to a report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies last year:

“Based on the experience of the national school breakfast programme, the estimated annual cost today would be around £55 per pupil participating for food-only provision and double that (around £110) for a ‘traditional’ before-school breakfast club. Labour’s manifesto offers £315 million overall in 2028; this could be enough to fund all primary school pupils under a food-only model, or 60% of pupils if the party plumps for a traditional breakfast club with some childcare element.”

Will the Secretary of State respond to that point made by the IFS? Do the Government plan food-only provision? If not, how does she plan to close that funding gap?

Paul Bertram, headteacher at Buxworth primary school in Derbyshire, told Schools Week that he had to pull out of the pilot scheme as it left him with a £9,000 funding shortfall. The charity Magic Breakfast said:

“if it is expected that 100 per cent of people can access a traditional breakfast club setting, with the appropriate staffing, then the Government is many, many millions away from the budget that we would expect that would require.”

Will the Secretary of State say how many schools applied to be part of the pilot, but subsequently pulled out? A number of journalists have asked that question. How many of the schools chosen to take part in the pilot already have a breakfast club, and how many already have a free breakfast club? Looking at the first 100 on the list, 71 have a breakfast club and 13 have a free breakfast club, but what are the numbers overall? If pupils need to have a one-to-one teaching assistant, how will funding for that work?

Ministers say that the policy

“will save parents up to £450 a year”.

The Secretary of State said that again today, but Ministers used to use a figure of £400. To give £450 to all 4.5 million pupils in primary schools would cost over £2 billion a year. In contrast, the pilot will cost £33 million. Labour’s manifesto said the programme will spend £315 million by 2028, which would mean a spend of £70 per primary school child, not £450. Will the Secretary of State explain the discrepancy between the planned spend and the much larger benefits that Ministers are claiming?

Parents on lower wages are bearing the brunt of the £25 billion increase in national insurance; as the Office for Budget Responsibility and the IFS have pointed out, that increase will directly hit wages, which even the Chancellor has now acknowledged. The biggest losers from that tax increase are those earning less than £15,000 a year. People who are among those most affected by the £25 billion tax increase may not feel better off from the £315 million of planned spending, so it is vital that we are clear about what Ministers are really claiming and on what basis.

I mentioned that 85% of schools already have a breakfast club. The new requirement to offer free school breakfasts in all primary schools will interact with that existing provision in different ways. Many school breakfast clubs currently run for an hour on a paid-for basis, and I hope most will continue to provide at least the period they are providing now. However, if the breakfast club is provided for, say, an hour or more, the school will have to charge for the first 30 minutes of that hour, but not for the final 30 minutes, which is likely to give rise to considerable complexity. Will Ministers agree to report on the length of time that clubs are running in these schools, and on any reduction that this change may inadvertently bring about?

Taxpayer-funded breakfasts for those who really need them are helpful, but there are a number of questions about Ministers’ plans and their claims about the scheme, so I look forward to the Secretary of State’s answers.

[Bridget Phillipson]

The shadow Minister asks a number of questions, but at no point did he welcome the massive investment and the benefits that this provision will bring to children across our country, including in his own constituency—not a word of support. I hope when the breakfast club in his constituency opens, he might take time to visit that school and see the massive benefits being delivered to children and families.

Before I respond to the number of detailed questions that the hon. Gentleman asked, I note once again how disappointing it was that the Conservatives voted to block the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Let us remind ourselves what that would have meant. It would have completely stopped the roll-out of free breakfast clubs we are announcing today; they will be rolled out across England subject to the progress of the Bill. It would have stopped us limiting the number of branded uniform items that schools can demand, which again will save families hundreds of pounds at a time when we know that they are under real pressure. Most shamefully of all, the hon. Gentleman knows full well that it would have stopped dead some of the most far-reaching child protection measures in a generation, just so that the Conservatives could grab a cheap headline.

The hon. Gentleman talked about the national school breakfast programme and the investment there. That programme is an online platform from which schools can order food. It covers 75% of food only; it does not cover wider costs, and schools are required to contribute the remaining 25%, so there is a significant difference in what we are setting out. One in seven of the schools in the pilot scheme that we are announcing today have no before-school provision. The rest have a mix of paid-for provision or, in many cases, school breakfast clubs where caps are in place and the numbers are limited. The breakfast clubs we are introducing will be free and available to every child and every parent who seeks to take them up. That is why it is estimated that parents will save £450 a year.

When it comes to evidence of the roll-out, the hon. Gentleman has said on many occasions that he is interested in evidence-based policymaking. The evidence is very clear that the impact is greatest at primary school level, and we would think that he would recognise that.

The purpose behind the early adopters is not simply to demonstrate to parents the difference that a Labour Government are bringing and a real difference to children’s lives; they also allow us to test really effectively what works ahead of a full national roll-out. That is why we want to work with school leaders as part of this programme to ensure that all children are able to benefit from universal free breakfast clubs across our country, including children with SEND.

The Conservatives have no plan for education except preserving the tax breaks for students in private schools, whereas we have a plan to give every child the best start in life. If they are going to spend the next five years defending their record, we will get on and deliver the change that this country voted for. We made a promise to the people of this country, and today we are delivering on the promise we made.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Chair of the Education Committee.

[Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement today. I welcome the news that St Luke’s Church of England primary school in my constituency will be one of the early adopters of a universal breakfast club under the programme.

All too often, children with special educational needs and disabilities are excluded from extracurricular activities, and it is the parents of children with SEND who often find it the hardest to access childcare. It is essential that children with SEND have equal access to breakfast clubs in both mainstream and specialist schools. What steps are being taken to ensure that that is the case, that schools have the capacity to provide specialist staff where needed and that any additional home-to-school transport costs, which are often essential in enabling children with SEND physically to access a breakfast club, will be met?

[Bridget Phillipson]

Some 754 schools have been selected to take part in the early adopters scheme, of which 704 are mainstream schools and 50 are special schools and alternative provision settings. That is important, because we want to make sure that all children in time are able to benefit from the roll-out of breakfast clubs. We will work closely with schools and sector experts to develop the programme as we intend to roll it out. I really want to learn through the early adopter schools how we can best create a truly universal and inclusive breakfast school provision.

I recognise that delivering breakfast clubs may be particularly challenging for special and alternative provision schools. We have invited them to take part in the early adopters scheme so that we can make sure that, as we roll out across the country, including in mainstream schools, the needs of all children are properly catered for as part of the programme.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)]

With three in 10 children growing up in poverty, any measure to tackle child hunger is to be welcomed to enable them to learn and flourish, so I congratulate the 750 schools selected as breakfast club early adopters. The learnings from those pilots will be absolutely critical as the Government seek to scale up the programme.

A number of questions that I have previously put to Ministers still stand, and I hope that the Secretary of State will address some of them. Many school leaders have raised concerns about the proposed funding rates, which are reportedly around 60p per child per day. If the pilots clearly show that those rates are insufficient, will Ministers commit to reviewing and increasing them? Schools simply cannot afford to make savings elsewhere, such as in teaching budgets.

Will Ministers review school food standards to ensure that breakfasts are specifically addressed, as the recent House of Lords report on childhood obesity recommended? What consideration has been given to how the 30 minutes of universal free childcare provision will interact with existing breakfast club provision? Most commuting parents need more than 30 minutes of childcare in the morning.

The Child Poverty Action Group has highlighted that breakfast clubs will probably secure only around 40% take-up. The most vulnerable children, especially those in temporary accommodation who travel long distances, may not make it to school in time for breakfast. The Children’s Society has argued, as have the Liberal Democrats, that where money is scarce, we should target resources at those who most need them. As such, why will the Government not prioritise expanding eligibility for free school meals—a hot, healthy meal in the middle of the day when children are guaranteed to be in school —so that all children in poverty, whether in primary or secondary, are being fed? Is it not high time that Ministers introduced automatic enrolment into free school meals for all children?

Finally, on the Secretary of State’s childcare announcements, can she confirm how much of that money will go into plugging the gap left by the rise in employer national insurance contributions, which will put significant pressure on providers and push up costs for parents?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her questions. Turning first to the question of funding, there has sadly been some misunderstanding about the funding rates, so I will set those out for the benefit of the House. In the summer term, funding will be paid in two parts: an up-front, one-off payment of £500 to cover initial set-up costs and, alongside that, a lump sum payment of £1,099 to cover fixed staffing costs for the summer term. That is in addition to the per pupil funding rates that exist in both mainstream and specialist provision; of course, rates will be higher in special schools, recognising the additional needs and staffing requirements that exist there. Schools will receive support to manage the requirements of the scheme, and will be provided with opportunities to learn from one another.

On food standards, we always seek to keep all those areas under review. We want to make sure that all the food served in our schools is healthy and nutritious, so that children are well fed and ready to learn. The school food statutory guidance, which regulates the food and drink provided in schools, already applies to breakfast. We want to ensure that healthy meals are offered as part of breakfast clubs, and we will continue to keep these areas under review.

The hon. Lady is right to ask about existing wraparound provision. We expect the two offers to be complementary; schools will be able to provide a paid-for offer alongside the 30 minutes of childcare and food through the universal offer. I note her concerns about child poverty, and strongly agree that there is a need for further action to tackle the shocking rates of child poverty we see in our country. That is why, together with the Work and Pensions Secretary, we are leading work across Government as part of the child poverty taskforce. We look forward to setting out further findings from that work in due course, including to this House. We are considering a range of measures and ways in which we can support children out of poverty—the shocking legacy left behind by the last Conservative Government.

The hon. Lady asks about the additional investment going into the sector. The big investment that we are putting into the early years pupil premium and the expansion grant will be crucial to providing the support that the sector needs to deliver the places and staffing required ahead of September. I look forward to continuing to work with her to make sure we get this right.

[Jen Craft (Thurrock) (Lab)]

I warmly welcome today’s announcement of the breakfast club pilot areas, including the two schools in my constituency, which will make a massive difference to the lives of many working families. However, on the subject of breakfast clubs, as an SEN parent I would like to issue the plea, “Don’t you forget about me.” Too often, SEN parents and their children find that policy moves ahead without them, and there is a risk that we could be slightly overlooked in this area. What measures has the Secretary of State put in place to make sure that disabled children and those with additional needs can fully take part in breakfast clubs?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising this important area. She is right that breakfast clubs must be fully inclusive and take account of the needs of all children, including children with SEND. That is why, as part of this process, we have announced 50 special and AP schools that will be taking part in the early adopters scheme. They will receive a higher funding rate of £3.23 a pupil, in addition to support for set-up costs and termly payments. I recognise the need to ensure that breakfast clubs operating in mainstream schools can cater to the needs of a wide range of children. That is why we are developing a toolkit for providers of wraparound care, including breakfast clubs, so that the provision that is put in place is inclusive for all children.

[Simon Hoare (North Dorset) (Con)]

The Secretary of State makes a compelling argument on the merits of breakfast for many of our young children and the benefits that it has for learning. Can she say a word or two on two points? First, will she answer the question being raised in the secondary sector about future funding beyond the agreed time period? Secondly, what incentives can she put in place to encourage schools to procure foodstuffs that are produced locally? That would give good support to our local food producers and our farmers.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree with the hon. Gentleman about the importance of supporting local providers where that is possible and the fantastic contribution of British food and wider produce. I just observe that it is my understanding that his constituency is set to benefit from the early adopters scheme. I hope that he will be able to see the fantastic benefit that it will bring to children and families in his constituency. The national school breakfast programme will continue for the next year, but that covers only 75% of food. Schools are required to fund the additional 25% of costs. Our new breakfast clubs will be about more than just food; they will be about the wider opportunities that children in primary school will have at the start of the school day, and the costs will cover staffing, delivery and food.

[Darren Paffey (Southampton Itchen) (Lab)]

I warmly welcome this statement and the firm actions that my right hon. Friend is taking to make sure that we can level the playing field and boost attendance and attainment for children in Southampton Itchen and beyond. I am particularly delighted that St John’s primary and nursery school will get this investment from the Government as part of the early adopters programme. Will the Secretary of State detail what conversations she is having about how the monitoring will work, so that the national roll-out can be based on the best evidence? Ahead of perhaps 749 other invitations, may I invite her to visit St John’s to see the breakfast club in action?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am delighted to hear about the good news for St John’s. I am sure that the Minister for Early Education, my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan), and I will receive lots of invitations to visit fantastic breakfast clubs across our country. We will do our best to service those invitations, but with more than 750, it might be a bit of a stretch. We will try our very best. My hon. Friend the Member for Southampton Itchen (Darren Paffey) is right to identify the need to develop learning and understanding about what works across the early adopters. That is why the schools taking part in this pilot cover a range of settings and serve communities with a range of different needs—both rural and urban—and of different kinds, so that we can ensure a fully representative sample ahead of full roll-out.

[Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)]

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for her statement. As a child brought up on free milk and free school meals, I very much welcome and support the Government’s plans to set up universal breakfast clubs in all primary schools. However, concerns are reported among headteachers, unions and charities that the plans will not be properly funded and will lack the flexibility required to be successful. This weekend, the independent publication Schools Week highlighted how some headteachers in primary schools, while enthusiastic about the aims, refused to take part in the early adopters pilot scheme as volunteer schools, because only 60p was being provided by the Government per pupil. The budgets of schools in my constituency of Dewsbury and Batley, as well as those across the country, are already stretched beyond breaking point. Will the Secretary of State therefore confirm that adequate funding for healthy foods, as well as the necessary flexibilities, will be provided to all primary schools for the breakfast clubs? Will she guarantee that schools will not be left out of pocket?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am confident that the funding being made available to schools will be sufficient to deliver on this programme. The hon. Gentleman quotes the daily per pupil funding rate, but alongside that, as I set out earlier, there will be start-up costs, as well as lump-sum payments to cover the costs of running breakfast clubs, alongside a higher daily funding rate for special schools and a higher daily funding rate based on the proportion of FSM6 pupils at the school.

[Mrs Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

First, my congratulations go to Pool Hayes primary school in Willenhall for being one of the 750 early adopters. Will the Secretary of State outline how the free universal roll-out of breakfast clubs, alongside capping the number of branded items of uniform and expanding funded childcare, will help families in Wolverhampton North East with the cost of living?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am delighted that my hon. Friend’s constituency is part of the early adopters programme. Our breakfast clubs scheme is all about making sure that children get a great start to their school day—a welcoming space that provides them with valuable opportunities to play, learn and socialise. However, as she identifies, the measures we are setting out to the House today on the early adopters scheme, as well as the measures in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, will also make a big difference to parents. They will put more money back into their pockets by limiting the costs of school uniform and providing more support around breakfast clubs. That is the difference a Labour Government make.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I welcome very much the Secretary of State’s commitment to the scheme. I know it is an England scheme, but we have a similar scheme in Northern Ireland. Every one of us as MPs has attended Kellogg’s events in the House, and we understand the commitment that Kellogg’s can make. Has the Secretary of State considered whether other companies could do similar to what Kellogg’s does in relation to schools? For instance, bakeries and those who make jam or marmalade could do something. Indeed, we know that the superstores dump their food out or dispose of it within 24 hours. That is good food going to waste. There might be better ways. Perhaps she can help us to achieve that.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that there is always more that we can do, and I note that many companies already involve themselves in important charitable works in this area. He names one company. It would be remiss of me, as a north-east MP, not to give a special plug to Greggs, which does fantastic work in this space, too. Alongside the national roll-out of breakfast clubs that we intend to deliver, we continue to believe that there is an important role for organisations such as Magic Breakfast, Greggs and Kellogg’s in supporting schools and children.

[Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)]

I welcome the introduction of free breakfast clubs for all primary schools, including Robin Hood primary school in Leeds South West and Morley. Such clubs provide £450 of savings to parents and extra childcare, and we know that children should not have to start the day hungry. What can the Secretary of State tell the primary schools in my constituency about the full roll-out? When can they expect to see breakfast clubs in their schools?

[Bridget Phillipson]

We intend to deliver the roll-out as soon as possible, because we know it is urgent, and we know the difference it will make to children’s lives. Free universal breakfast clubs will also mean that every primary school child, no matter their circumstances, is well prepared to learn. That is why we believe in that important provision being universal and available to all children. Today is an important step forward, and Robin Hood primary school will be an important part of how we develop and understand how to roll out the programme nationally.

[Florence Eshalomi (Vauxhall and Camberwell Green) (Lab/Co-op)]

I agree with the Secretary of State that every single child deserves the best start in life, but if we are honest, we know that not every child has that. This programme will make such a big difference to so many children, including children at Van Gogh primary school, Henry Fawcett primary school and Crawford primary school in my constituency. The Secretary of State is always welcome to come and visit any of those three.

We know that this programme will make a big difference for many parents, too. One of the other pushes behind the free breakfast clubs is that they are really good for children’s attainment and attendance. The early adopters start in April. What is the timeline for reviewing them, especially in light of some of the funding concerns that other Members have raised?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I strongly agree with my hon. Friend about the need to ensure that every child has the best start in life. I am grateful for her generous invitation, and I am sure that my hon. Friend the Early Education Minister and I will consider it along with, no doubt, a great many other invitations.

We intend to test and learn as we go along to ensure that the scheme is being rolled out effectively. This is a crucial part of ensuring that all children have opportunities at the start of the school day to play, to learn, to socialise and to benefit from that softer start. My hon. Friend was right to mention evidence from the Education Endowment Foundation which demonstrates the impact of breakfast clubs on attendance, attainment and behaviour, affecting not just the children who benefit but the whole school community.

[Josh Fenton-Glynn (Calder Valley) (Lab)]

Stories of children arriving for lessons hungry are far too common in my constituency and across the country, and the issue was exacerbated by the massive rise in child poverty under the last Government. Because of the actions of this Labour Government, however, my constituency will see pilots in Cornholme junior, infant and nursery school, Scout Road academy, Elland Church of England junior, infant and nursery school, and Luddenden Church of England school. Will the Minister confirm that the child poverty strategy, when it is delivered, will build on that and make the scandal of children missing meals a thing of the past?

[Bridget Phillipson]

It is a privilege to co-chair the child poverty taskforce with my right hon. Friend the Work and Pensions Secretary. We have heard evidence across the country as a result of visits to Northern Ireland and Scotland—and will visit Wales shortly—to understand the challenges faced by so many families throughout the United Kingdom, and what is required to bring down the number of children growing up in poverty. We are considering a range of measures because of the dreadful record left by the Conservative Government: we have seen countless thousands of children grow up in avoidable poverty. The hon. Member for Farnham and Bordon (Gregory Stafford), who is sitting on the Opposition Front Bench, can shake his head all he likes, but that is a fact.

[Peter Dowd (Bootle) (Lab)]

I welcome the statement, and it will also be welcomed by the families of children attending St Monica’s Catholic primary school and King’s Lander primary academy. We look forward to the extension and expansion of my right hon. Friend’s proposals. Does she agree that they are food for thought in the most literal and practical sense of the term?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am delighted to hear about the schools in my hon. Friend’s constituency that are taking part in the scheme. They will play a crucial role in how we find the most effective way of delivering this on a national basis. I believe it is essential for all children to arrive at school ready to learn, with full bellies and hungry minds.

[Nesil Caliskan (Barking) (Lab)]

Parents and teachers in my constituency will welcome the statement, as will, in particular, Monteagle and Richard Alibon primary schools, which are part of the early roll-out. The Secretary of State referred briefly to the evidence-based relationship between those who attend breakfast clubs and attainment; that is particularly important in my constituency, where 19% of children are frequently absent. Can she give us some more details about the evidence of a link between attendance at breakfast clubs and long-term school attendance?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the significant challenges relating to attendance. Breakfast clubs are an important part of support for children in respect of behaviour, attendance and attainment, and the evidence is very clear in that regard. I pay tribute to the school leaders and staff who will be involved in this important endeavour to support children at the start of the school day: their efforts will allow us to effectively roll out a national scheme that will benefit children the length and breadth of our country, and I am grateful for their contribution.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her important policy announcement, and I thank her in particular for the investment in Caversham Park and St Anne’s Catholic primary schools in my constituency. Can she give any further details of the evaluation of the programme over time?

[Bridget Phillipson]

We will update the House to ensure that Members are aware of the continuation of the roll-out and its progress, but also so that we can learn how it is progressing as quickly and effectively as possible. I am delighted to hear about the schools in my hon. Friend’s constituency.

[Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)]

Gwinear Community primary school is one of the 750 early adopters, and I am extremely pleased that they have joined in. Does the Secretary of State agree that this is part of an overall strategy to ensure that all children can gain access to the education that they deserve—a strategy that has been profoundly missing for the last 14 years?

[Bridget Phillipson]

As my hon. Friend says, breakfast clubs are an important part of ensuring that all children are set up to succeed and every child has the best start in life, but we need to go much further, and, indeed, we are doing so as a Labour Government. We are seeking to break the link between background and success, so that more children than ever—a record proportion—are school-ready at the age of five. As we all know, the evidence points to the fact that children who slip behind at that crucial moment suffer later in life, and I want to ensure that every child in the country has the chance to get on.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

I am delighted that Denbigh primary school and Someries infant school are two of the first schools to benefit from Labour’s universal free breakfast clubs. We know that a balanced, nutritious breakfast will set children up for the school day and improve attendance and attainment. Does the Secretary of State agree that Labour’s delivery on its manifesto commitment, through our plan for change, is clear evidence that we are committed to breaking down barriers to opportunity and ensuring that all children have the best chance in life?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I do agree with my hon. Friend. The need for action is urgent. We know that far too many children are not achieving all that they can, and are held back by virtue of their backgrounds. We are determined to turn that around, and the announcement I have made today shows the determination of this Labour Government to ensure that background is no barrier to success. I am delighted that we have made such rapid progress, with more than 750 early adopters from April.

[Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)]

I welcome the statement, and I am very glad that Chaucer infant and nursery school in my constituency signed up to the early adopters scheme. When I had the great privilege of visiting the school recently, Miss Dawley gave me an excellent tour and I had a fantastic discussion with the smart school council about its priorities for our community. Free breakfast clubs will provide a real financial boost for families in my constituency, who have struggled greatly as a result of the cost of living crisis. Will the Secretary of State say more about how they will improve the opportunities available to children in Erewash?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I send my best wishes to Miss Dawley and to the whole school community. They are clearly doing fantastic work to support children in my hon. Friend’s area. Of course breakfast clubs in primary schools bring benefits to parents at the start of the school day, giving them choices and flexibility at work, but, critically, this is about boosting children’s life chances. The evidence is very clear about the impact on attendance, behaviour and attainment. This is a crucial part of ensuring that background is no barrier to getting on in life.

[Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Highgate) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State will be well aware of the impact of covid on the wellbeing and attainment of children who are now at primary school, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds. This welcome intervention will make a massive difference to that covid cohort, but may I press the Secretary of State on the next steps for them, in terms of attainment but also mental health? What is her Department doing to ensure that there is more mental health provision, especially in primary schools?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I think we all recognise, both as constituency Members and from the work that we see taking place across the country, the serious impact of the pandemic on young people and their mental health and the long waiting lists for specialist support from child and adolescent mental health services. I am working closely with the Health Secretary to ensure that we roll out more mental health support throughout our schools so that children have access to the support that they need at the earliest possible point.

[Alex Baker (Aldershot) (Lab)]

I am delighted that four schools in my constituency are taking part in the scheme—The Ferns primary academy and Farnborough Grange nursery/infant community school in Farnborough, and St Joseph’s Catholic primary school in Aldershot. What is my right hon. Friend’s message to parents in my constituency who are eager for their children’s school to join the scheme so that they can benefit from Labour’s plan for change in Aldershot and Farnborough?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My message to parents in Aldershot and across our country is that this Labour Government are on their side and delivering better work choices for them, and more support for their children at the start of the school day, when it comes to breakfast clubs and the early adopters scheme. We are also taking action to cut the cost of school uniforms—an area that I know many parents find a real pressure—and expanding childcare and early years entitlement, so that parents across our country, including in my hon. Friend’s constituency, are able to take up the places that have been promised.

[Alistair Strathern (Hitchin) (Lab)]

As a former teacher and local authority children’s lead, I got to see at first hand the transformative impact that breakfast clubs can have in driving up attendance, attainment and young people’s wellbeing, so I am delighted that not one, not two, but three local schools will benefit from the Government’s early adopters scheme. As excited as I am for primary-age pupils at Meppershall, Shefford lower and Etonbury academy in Stotfold, I want to make sure that even more can benefit. How will the Government make sure that we learn the lessons of the pilots as quickly as possible, so that every pupil in my constituency and across the country who is eligible for the commitment can benefit from it?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The schools in my hon. Friend’s constituency will play an important role in determining how we can roll out this commitment right across our country. Of course, the early adopters in his community will make a really meaningful difference to parents and children, but they will also give us the opportunity to test and learn as we go and, crucially, to demonstrate the impact of a universal breakfast club offer. We know that that is the way we can make sure that we reach some of the families that might find it more difficult to access such provision, because it is a less stigmatising way of reaching those in greatest need.

[Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)]

I thank and congratulate the headteachers and staff at Meldreth, Great Wilbraham and Stapleford primary schools in my constituency. Will the Minister explain to them how important it is that the learning that takes place in those schools will ensure the roll-out of breakfast clubs to all schools in my constituency and across the country?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I pay tribute to the schools in the hon. Lady’s constituency, and to the workforce there, for the fantastic efforts that they have made in order to take part in this scheme. I look forward to seeing the impact it has in schools in her community and in constituencies across the country, so that we can make sure that when we roll out this scheme nationwide, we do so on the basis of the best available evidence, taken from a range of different contexts in different constituencies across England.

[Josh Simons (Makerfield) (Lab)]

As a newly elected Member of this place, I try to visit a school in my constituency every week. Time and again, parents tell me, as they did last week at Hindley All Saints primary, that having a child in this country is too expensive and too exhausting, which is why I really welcome the programme that the Secretary of State has set out today. In a few weeks’ time, I am hosting a coffee morning at the family hub in Hindley, where parents are coming to discuss the issues that they face, particularly dads, who often do not show up to these things. Will the Secretary of State assure the House that she will tightly monitor the timeline for rolling out this fantastic programme beyond the early adopters and to other schools that will benefit, including those in my constituency?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his work in his community to support families. He is right to suggest that all parents experience challenges at different points. Being a parent is a wonderful job, but it can also be a very challenging job at times, and the Government are determined to make sure that support is always available to families. We want to ensure that as we roll out this programme across the country as quickly as we can, we learn the lessons about what works in different parts of our country. I give my hon. Friend my commitment that the action that we are taking as a Government will benefit families right across his constituency. We are taking action on school uniform costs, rolling out childcare and early years entitlements, and making sure that children have more early and timely access to support in areas like SEND.

[Mr Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)]

Does my right hon. Friend think that a breakfast club might have helped the attendance on the Opposition Benches and, indeed, the Conservatives’ grasp of basic maths? Does my right hon. Friend agree that Barton primary school in my constituency of Isle of Wight West has taken an important step forward in improving the outcomes for all its pupils, and that this is one of the many important first steps that she is taking to fix an education system that has been ruined by the previous Government?

[Bridget Phillipson]

Attendance has been a bit slim on the Opposition Benches this afternoon. In my response to the shadow Minister, I said that one would think that Members from across the House would welcome the difference that breakfast clubs will make to communities the length and breadth of our country, because they have been selected in a range of different constituencies to ensure that we learn from what is effective and what works. I am delighted that my hon. Friend’s constituency will be part of this scheme. The work that school leaders, teachers and staff will carry out in this important endeavour will allow us to roll out breakfast clubs, making a real difference to children across our country.

[Lewis Atkinson (Sunderland Central) (Lab)]

I know that my right hon. Friend and constituency neighbour, the Secretary of State, is personally committed to delivering the best start to life for children in Sunderland, and I warmly welcome the fact that the Richard Avenue, Hudson Road, St Joseph’s and Dame Dorothy schools in my constituency have been announced as early adopters. Will she say a little bit about regional variation in the availability of early years staff, which, as she knows, is a particular challenge in our city?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is right to identify the variation that exists across our country, including when it comes to early years places and provision. We have almost doubled the early years pupil premium to make sure that providers are supported to create places in communities that are in greatest need, but where places do not currently exist in the way that we would wish.

When it comes to the staffing of breakfast clubs, I am delighted that schools in Sunderland Central will benefit. It will be for schools to determine how best to use the funding to staff breakfast clubs, and there is no expectation that it should be carried out by teachers. Existing breakfast clubs use a mixture of provision, which will continue, and the early adopters will allow us to test and learn, and to strengthen delivery, as part of a national roll-out.

[Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)]

I thank my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for giving families in Carlisle not one, not two, but seven reasons to be cheerful today. Those seven reasons are the schools of Yewdale, Inglewood, Blackford, Hallbankgate, Bishop Harvey Goodwin, Castle Carrock and Brook Street. These seven schools represent the full breadth, potential and diversity of Carlisle and north Cumbria, from the inner-city school of Brook Street, where many families have English as a second language and where opportunity is all too often denied to the children, to village schools such as Castle Carrick and Hallbankgate, where dropping off at school time can mean that parents cannot take advantage of the opportunities that exist in the city. Will the Secretary of State say a little more about the opportunity that will be unlocked for parents as a result of today’s announcement?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is right to highlight the fact that the early adopters scheme covers schools serving a wide range of settings and communities. We have sought to ensure that there is a representative sample—large and small—of those serving communities with higher levels of deprivation and those with lower levels. The early adopters scheme that we are introducing will have real benefits for parents in Carlisle, including by offering the flexibility at the start of the school day to drop off children a bit earlier, and to take on more hours at work or to get to work. The scheme will make a difference to children’s life chances too, because the evidence is so clear that a softer start to the school day makes a big difference to children’s attendance, their behaviour and, crucially, their attainment at school.

[Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)]

I welcome today’s announcement, and I am very pleased to see that St Williams primary and Kinsale infant school in my constituency of Norwich North will be among those that benefit from the early adopters programme—they are two of the 12 schools in Norfolk that will benefit. Will the Secretary of State expand on the “test and learn” principle? As we feed that in nationally, how will we feed it back to schools on an ongoing basis so that they can make improvements, and are there opportunities for schools to join up locally in areas such as procurement?

--- Later in debate ---

[Bridget Phillipson]

We will provide the opportunities that my hon. Friend outlines to ensure that schools work with one another to develop best practice, to learn from what works in similar settings, and to make sure that breakfast clubs in those schools are as effective and accessible as they can be. We know that breakfast clubs make a really big difference to children and their life chances, and I am delighted that the Government have been able to move so rapidly in starting the roll-out across our country.

[Alison Hume (Scarborough and Whitby) (Lab)]

It is shameful that after the last Labour Government lifted 1.1 million children out of poverty, years of neglect by Conservative Governments saw an increasing number of children going to school hungry, which limits their learning and life chances. I warmly welcome the announcement that four schools in my constituency will be able to offer a free breakfast club from April: Ruswarp and Fylingdales, as well as St Peter’s and St George’s over in Scarborough. Does my right hon. Friend agree that these breakfast clubs show how this Government are not only supporting working parents, but delivering on our promise to tackle child poverty?

[Bridget Phillipson]

Opposition Members never like to have it pointed out to them that on their watch we saw rising levels of child poverty in our country, which have scarred the life chances of a generation and have left families struggling. As a Labour Government, we are determined to make a difference and to ensure that background is no barrier to getting on in life. I am grateful that my hon. Friend is such a champion for her constituents in making sure that where people are from does not determine everything they can go on to achieve. The fact that we are delivering on our commitments, not even eight months into this Labour Government, demonstrates the difference that voting Labour makes.

[Sojan Joseph (Ashford) (Lab)]

I welcome this announcement, under which my constituents in Ashford will benefit from free breakfast clubs in three schools: Downs View infants school, Kingsnorth primary school and Chilmington primary school. Giving children a chance to settle down and start their day at a club with friends will have a positive long-term impact on their mental health. Does my right hon. Friend agree that this needs to be rolled out to every primary school as soon as possible?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree, and we will do so as quickly as we can. My hon. Friend is right to highlight the important benefits that breakfast clubs deliver by enabling children to socialise and play at the start of the school day. I have seen so many fantastic examples of breakfast clubs already in operation that make such a profound difference to children by giving them a chance to spend time with friends, play and learn ahead of starting the school day, as well as the crucial boost that having a healthy breakfast delivers.

[Andrew Cooper (Mid Cheshire) (Lab)]

I am delighted that five schools in my constituency—Hartford Manor, Over Hall, Winsford High Street, Victoria Road and St Joseph’s—will be among the first to offer breakfast clubs. I pay tribute to the leaders of those schools, who, by putting forward their schools, will ensure that children in my area start the day ready to learn. The evidence suggests that this will improve attainment, increase attendance and enhance wellbeing, while boosting those children’s overall life chances. To ensure that all children can benefit from free breakfast clubs, can my right hon. Friend tell me what steps are being taken to ensure that breakfast clubs are inclusive and accessible for children with SEND?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to the school leaders in his community, who will be a part—a very important part—of our early adopters scheme. I thank them for their contribution. He is right to highlight the important need for all breakfast clubs to be inclusive, including for children with SEND, which is why, through this process, we will be able to learn from what works. It is also why, alongside announcements about breakfast clubs in mainstream schools, we are announcing specialist provision—alternative provision schools will be a part of this—so that we can learn from the best practice that exists in the specialist sector and ensure that mainstream schools can also develop it.

[Tom Collins (Worcester) (Lab)]

There is no doubt that this Government’s introduction of free breakfast clubs will be transformative for many families. Worcester has always been a pioneering city, and as a city that trains teachers, we are a hub for education, so I am particularly pleased at today’s announcement that no fewer than three of our local schools—Oasis, Red Hill and Riversides—have been selected as early adopters of breakfast clubs. Will the Secretary of State elaborate on how this pilot contributes to ending poverty and ensuring that every child has the opportunity to thrive, achieve and succeed?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The children and families at my hon. Friend’s schools in Worcester will benefit directly from the early adopters programme, but they will also be an important part of how we roll out this scheme nationwide, allowing us to develop best practice. I pay tribute to the schools and their leaders in his community for taking part in the scheme. He is absolutely right that we want to ensure that all children are set up to succeed at the start of the school day, so that they can achieve, thrive and succeed in every way possible.

[Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)]

Parents and families of children at Knockhall primary school in Greenhithe in my constituency will be delighted to hear that it is a breakfast club early adopter. This will ensure that pupils start their day well fed and ready to learn, and it will save families money. Will the Secretary of State say a little more about how the learning, nutritional and cost-of-living benefits will be evaluated?

[Bridget Phillipson]

Through the early adopters programme, schools will be able to take part in a peer-to-peer support network, so that they can work together to share expertise and approaches at a regional level, which will be crucial to the work we take forward on the national roll-out. The school in my hon. Friend’s constituency will not just play a role in supporting families locally; it will be an essential part of how we learn what works and what is most effective. We want to ensure that best practice is spread across the country as we roll out breakfast clubs nationwide.

[David Baines (St Helens North) (Lab)]

I am delighted that three schools in my constituency—Ashurst primary, Garswood primary and PACE—are part of this initial roll-out, and I am delighted for them. I was also delighted to hear Carr Mill primary school in my constituency get a mention by the Secretary of State in her statement. I congratulate Mr Maley, the headteacher, and all the staff on the outstanding work they are clearly already doing—I know they are doing it, because I used to work there, and it is a great school.

Like many Members, I have already been contacted today by other families and schools to ask when they can be part of this scheme. Can the Secretary of State assure me and my constituents that the Government will work as quickly as possible to roll it out to all primary schools? Can she also assure my constituents who are concerned about school funding that schools will be properly resourced to deliver this, as well as everything else they have to do?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I can say to my hon. Friend’s constituents and those across St Helens that we will ensure that schools have the resources they need to deliver the roll-out of breakfast clubs, both for early adopters and beyond. As we get this initial phase under way, it is essential that we learn what works ahead of the national roll-out. We are determined to roll out breakfast clubs nationwide as quickly as possible, but the fact that we can announce the early adopters scheme starting from April demonstrates the difference that a Labour Government make.

[Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)]

I strongly welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement, and I cannot tell her how delighted I am that four schools in my constituency, with over 1,300 children, will be early adopters under this scheme. I pay tribute to the leaders of Skelton primary, Lockwood primary, Pennyman primary and St Bernadette’s primary for their leadership. Does my right hon. Friend agree with me that, as far as children of working families are concerned, this Government are on their side and focused on making sure they have the best start in life and the best start to the school day?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am delighted that four schools in my hon. Friend’s constituency are taking part, and I look forward to all primary schools across Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland benefiting from the roll-out of breakfast clubs across our country. This Labour Government are on the side of working parents, putting more money back into parents’ pockets, supporting parents at the start of the school day and cutting the costs of the school day. That is the difference that a Labour Government bring, and that is the difference that electing my hon. Friend to this place brings.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement.

National Apprenticeship Week

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Tuesday 11th February 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

This is National Apprenticeship Week, when we celebrate the life-changing opportunities that apprenticeships offer people up and down this country. I want to update the House on a range of steps that this Government are taking to introduce the greater flexibility in our apprenticeships system that learn to break down barriers to opportunity and boost economic growth.

First, we have confirmed today that we will be changing the rules relating to achievement of English and maths qualifications as part of an apprenticeship for over-19s. Upskilling in English and maths will continue to remain a key feature of all apprenticeships, and from today we have listened to employers and will be offering more flexibility over when a stand-alone qualification is required in addition to this.

All apprentices will be required to secure, and will be assessed on, the job-specific skills—English and maths—that they need. But, moving forward, employers will have more flexibility over whether adult apprentices—over-19s—are required to achieve a stand-alone English and maths qualifications. In future, adult apprentices will be able to complete their apprenticeship if they have demonstrated that they have the skills—including relevant English and maths skills—to be effective in the role without undertaking a stand-alone English and maths qualification. All 16 to 18-year-old apprentices will continue to be required and funded to secure up to a level 2 qualification in English and maths if they do not hold one, consistent with our expectation that all young people should have a meaningful further opportunity to secure a level 2 qualification in English and maths post 16. This delivers the flexibility that employers have long called for, and we expect it to lead to thousands more qualified apprentices in a range of key sectors, including in social care and construction.

Secondly, we will reduce the minimum duration of apprenticeships to eight months from August 2025. This new flexibility will mean that employers can make greater use of apprenticeships and learners can be fully trained more quickly. We expect this new flexibility to particularly benefit learners with high levels of prior learning, where the current 12-month requirement means they are not eligible for an apprenticeship; and particular occupations that do not typically work in fixed 12-month training cycles. We will be working closely with Skills England to identify where this new flexibility will have the greatest impact. Today we are announcing that the first shorter apprenticeships to be available to all apprentices will be in priority occupations, including healthcare support workers, dual fuel smart meter installers, and production assistants in the creative industries. We will be setting out more details in due course.

Finally, in our next step towards establishing Skills England as the key driving force behind this Government’s growth plans, I am confirming that the new chair of Skills England will be Phil Smith CBE, with Sir David Bell serving as vice-chair.

This team will bring together extensive industry experience in digital, tech and innovation, with decades of experience in the education and skills sector. They will work with employers, with national, regional and local government, and with providers and unions, to identify skills shortages and provide strong strategic direction for the skills system, ensuring that we have the highly skilled workforce needed to deliver our industrial strategy and the Government’s plan for change. I look forward to working with them to deliver the dynamic skills system and economic growth that this country needs to thrive.

[HCWS436]

School Accountability and Intervention

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Monday 3rd February 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

I am today launching a 12-week consultation on proposals to reform school accountability and announcing the next steps on the Government’s manifesto commitment to deliver regional improvement for standards and excellence (RISE) teams. Ofsted has also published its consultation on inspection reform and report cards today.

The proposals in these consultations are essential for delivering high and rising standards for every child, and to the Government’s mission to break down barriers to opportunity by working to ensure that every family, no matter where they live, can be confident of sending their child to a good local school.

In September 2024, my Department announced we would work on delivering a better accountability system that sets clear expectations, encourages improvement, and spreads excellence to drive high and rising standards for every child. Ofsted’s new report cards will raise the bar on what we expect from schools while providing a more complete picture of school performance. They will provide greater clarity on a school’s strengths and areas for improvement for the benefit of parents and school staff and encourage schools to work together to spread success. In contrast, single headline grades were low information for parents and high stakes for schools which is why we took swift action to remove them. They were too vague and left too many struggling schools without the support they needed to improve. The publication of these consultations is the next major step in delivering upon the Government’s manifesto commitments on school accountability, inspection, and improvement.

My Department is consulting on:

Our approach to improving school accountability, and some principles to guide our ongoing work in this area;

the Department’s future vision for implementation of school profiles—a new digital service which would provide more complete information about schools for parents. It includes proposals for bringing together Ofsted’s report cards with a range of up-to-date performance information. The consultation seeks views on if there is other information about the nature and quality of provision that should be included; and

new arrangements for intervention in maintained schools and academies including proposals for how the Department will identify schools for mandatory targeted RISE interventions, and the circumstances where we would change the organisation that governs a school. The plans, subject to consultation, will entail the Department mandating intervention in approximately twice as many schools per year. There will also be a universal RISE support service for all schools to support ongoing improvement across the school system.

Alongside launching the consultation, we have today announced the initial school eligibility criteria we will use for targeted RISE interventions starting this month. We are making available over £20 million for targeted RISE interventions over the next 15 months.

We are also announcing today that supporting all schools to improve pupil attendance will be the first national priority for the universal RISE support service.

The previous Government’s approach to improving schools was blunt and too slow. We will structurally intervene swiftly with schools with the most serious issues but will also broaden our approach to tackling failure, providing bespoke, intensive and timely intervention, to the different challenges identified in Ofsted report cards. Our approach will additionally help to spread best practice and foster a self-improving school system which our new RISE teams will act as a catalyst to help drive.

Copies of the Department for Education consultation and the Ofsted consultation will be deposited in the Libraries of both Houses.

[HCWS410]

Higher Education Student Support

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Monday 20th January 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

The Government announced on 4 November a significant package of measures to support students and stabilise the university sector.

We need to put our world-leading higher education sector on a secure footing in order to face the challenges of the next decade. Maximum fees for the 2025-26 academic year will increase by forecast inflation, 3.1%, providing additional financial help for higher education providers after seven years of frozen fees, which have resulted in their value falling by an estimated 28%.

The 3.1% increase to maximum fees for 2025-26 will help cement higher education providers’ roles as engines of growth in the heart of communities across the country and will mean they can continue to deliver high-quality education that boosts the life chances of those who choose this path.

Maximum tuition fees for a standard full-time course and the subsidised up-front loans available to students to pay their tuition will be increased by 3.1% to £9,535 for a standard full-time course; to £11,440 for a full-time accelerated course and to £7,145 for a part-time course for the 2025-26 academic year.

The increase in maximum tuition fees for 2025-26 applies to new and continuing students; however, higher education providers are autonomous and responsible for setting their own fees up to the maximum amounts.

In deciding whether or not to increase fees, providers will want to ensure that they can continue to deliver courses which are fit for purpose and help students achieve their ambitions. For continuing students, providers will also depend on their individual contracts with students, and providers will wish to make their own legal assessment of contracts when considering fee increases.

From the start of the 2025-26 academic year, a lower maximum fee limit of £5,760 is being introduced for foundation years in classroom-based subjects. A lower tuition fee loan limit of £5,760 is also being introduced to match the new tuition fee limit. We recognise the important role that foundation years play in promoting access to higher education, but we believe they can be delivered more efficiently, at lower costs to students.

Students will receive additional support for their living costs in 2025-26, with the largest cash increases for students from low-income families. This approach ensures that the most support is targeted at the poorest students, while keeping the student finance system financially sustainable.

Maximum undergraduate loans for living costs will be increased by forecast inflation, 3.1%, in 2025-26 with as much as £414 additional support for students on the lowest incomes who need the most help.

I am also announcing today further changes to student support for the 2025-26 academic year that will benefit students.

Maximum disabled students’ allowance for students with disabilities undertaking full-time and part-time undergraduate courses in 2025-26 will increase by 3.1%. Maximum grants for students with child or adult dependants who are attending full-time undergraduate courses will also increase by 3.1% in 2025-26.

We are also increasing support for students undertaking postgraduate courses in 2025-26.

Maximum loans for students starting master’s degree and doctoral degree courses from 1 August 2025 onwards will be increased by 3.1% in 2025-26. The same increase will apply to the maximum disabled students’ allowance for postgraduate students with disabilities in 2025-26.

Bereaved partners and children of Gurkhas and Hong Kong military veterans discharged before 1997 who have been granted indefinite leave to enter or indefinite leave to remain will not be subject to the three-year ordinary residence requirement but will instead need to be ordinarily resident in England on the course start date to qualify for student support and home fee status. This change is being introduced as these students may find it difficult to meet the normal ordinary residence requirements for student support and home fee status.

We will expect the higher education sector to demonstrate that, in return for the increased investment that we are asking students to make, they deliver the very best outcomes both for those students and for the country.

We have set out our five priorities for reform of the higher education system and will work in partnership with the sector over the coming months to shape the changes to Government policy that will be needed to support this reform. We will expect our higher education providers to:

Play a stronger role in expanding access and improving outcomes for disadvantaged students.

Make a stronger contribution to economic growth.

Play a greater civic role in their communities.

Raise the bar further on teaching standards, to maintain and improve our world-leading reputation and drive out poor practice.

Drive a sustained efficiency and reform programme.

We will then set out this Government’s plan for higher education reform by this summer.

Looking forward to the 2026-27 academic year, the lifelong learning entitlement (LLE) will deliver transformational change to the current student finance system by broadening access to high-quality, flexible education and training. The LLE will launch in 2026-27 for courses starting from January 2027.

Further details of the student support package for 2025-26 are set out in the document “Higher Education Fees and Student Support for 2025-26: Details”.

I have laid regulations implementing changes to maximum fees for undergraduates in 2025-26 on 20 January.

Alongside the regulations, we are publishing impact assessments on the changes to maximum fees for 2025-26 which draw on the Office for Students’ independent analysis of the wider financial pressures facing the higher education sector as well as an equality impact assessment of changes to fees and student support for 2025-26.

I also plan to lay further regulations implementing changes to student support for undergraduates and postgraduates for 2025-26 in February. Regulations are subject to parliamentary procedure.

Attachments can be viewed online at: http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2025-01-20/HCWS372/

[HCWS372]

Higher Education Regulatory Approach

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Wednesday 15th January 2025 Commons Chamber

3.16 pm

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

With permission, I shall make a statement on the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023.

In July 2024 I paused further commencement of the Act in response to concerns raised by a cross-section of voices. I took that decision because it is vital that we get this right. Our universities are one of this country’s greatest strengths, and I know Members across the House share my pride in a truly world-leading sector. At the centre of that excellence sit academic freedom and freedom of speech. The ability of our academics to explore and express new ideas through teaching and research is precious and we must protect it.

These fundamental freedoms are more important—much more important—than the wishes of some students not to be offended. University is a place for ideas to be exposed and debated, to be tried and tested. For young people, it is a space for horizons to be broadened, perspectives to be challenged and ideas to be examined. It is not a place for students to shut down any view with which they disagree.

Here is our starting point: academic freedom matters and freedom of speech matters, and we will preserve those two pillars of national strength, but we will proceed in a way that actually works. That is why we have carried out extensive engagement covering all corners of the debate: academics, universities, students; those for the Act and those against. All voices were heard.

I was especially keen to consider the views of minority groups, to learn how the Act might affect them, particularly given the shocking rise in antisemitism on campus. Standing here in this great Chamber of debate, I remain resolute about the importance of free speech, but our engagement on the Act has raised concerns that any responsible Government must take seriously. What was being proposed simply did not rise to the challenge: unworkable duties on student unions, a tort clogging up the court system, and the Office for Students obliged to consider a vast number of complex complaints.

There are also serious concerns over the Act’s potential impact on the welfare of minority groups. Many are worried that it could lead to increased harassment and discrimination on campus, and that the Act could push providers to overlook their safety. I share their concerns.

I reiterate that I am appalled by the rise in antisemitism on campus. In my view, rising antisemitism is best tackled through education, which is why I have confirmed £7 million in funding to tackle antisemitism in schools, colleges and universities.

I have reached a way forward that I believe is effective and proportionate, delivering an Act that is fair and workable. My decisions, subject to agreement from Parliament, will ensure that our higher education sector and the Office for Students continue to protect academic freedom and freedom of speech while ensuring the safety of minority groups.

I propose implementing key elements of the Act and returning others to Parliament for decisions on their amendment or repeal. I propose shortly commencing the following requirements currently in the Act: the duties on higher education providers to take reasonably practicable steps to secure and promote freedom of speech within the law; the duty on higher education providers to put in place a code of conduct on freedom of speech; and the ban on non-disclosure agreements for staff and students at higher education providers in cases of bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct. I also plan to commence the duties on the OfS to promote freedom of speech and the power to give advice and share best practice.

I will retain the director for free speech and academic freedom role, and I am pleased that Dr Ahmed will be staying on. I have complete confidence in Dr Ahmed. However, in my view, it is not right for this position to be a political appointee. The director should, of course, hold a deep belief in free speech and academic freedom, but their independence matters, and therefore their appointment must be free from any suspicion of political bias. Sir David Behan’s review of the OfS, commenced under the previous Government, recommended we reconsider how all OfS executive and board appointments should be made. I will decide on that shortly.

While there is much in the Act that is valuable, there are provisions that I do not believe to be proportionate or necessary, and which will drain resources from providers and distract from the other important issues they face. It is therefore my intention to return to Parliament to seek the repeal of two provisions.

The first is the duties on student unions in the Act. Student unions are neither equipped nor funded to navigate such a complex regulatory environment, and they are already regulated by the Charity Commission. However, I fully expect student unions to protect lawful free speech, whether they agree with the views expressed or not. I also expect HE providers to work closely with them to ensure that that happens and to act decisively to ensure their student unions comply with their free speech code of conduct.

The second provision I will seek to repeal is the tort. I have heard the views in favour of the tort, and understand the arguments being made. However, it would create costly litigation that would risk diverting resources away from students at a time when university finances are already strained. Members can be assured that the remaining routes of redress have plenty of teeth—the Office for Students will have powers to take tough regulatory action where universities and colleges do not meet their duties. Ultimately, an Act needs to be workable for its teeth to bite. How would Conservative Members rather our universities spend their time and resources: by lawyering up, or by focusing on high-quality teaching and groundbreaking research? In fact, the fear of litigation could hurt rather than help free speech, as universities may decide against inviting challenging speakers to avoid ending up in court, and nobody wants that.

I have a message for vice-chancellors who fail to take this seriously: protect free speech on your campuses or face the consequences. For too long, too many universities have been too relaxed about these issues, and too few took them seriously enough—and that must change.

There are other elements of the Act that I am planning to retain, but, with parliamentary agreement, to amend. I propose keeping a complaints scheme in place with the OfS. It is an important route of redress for anyone whose academic freedom or free speech has not been protected, and there must be a route for righting wrongs. However, it must be proportionate: the OfS should have the power to consider complaints, rather than a duty to assess every single complaint it receives, including those that are poorly put together or nonsensical. This way, the OfS will be freed up to prioritise the most serious complaints. I also want to remove the confusing duplication of complaints schemes for students. The Office of the Independent Adjudicator can already consider student complaints on free speech, and will continue to do so. The OfS complaints scheme will focus on complaints from staff, external speakers and university members.

I will also amend the OfS’s mandatory condition of registration to give it flexibility in how it applies this condition to different types of providers. The OfS should have room to determine the best way to regulate on a case-by-case basis. That is the only way to deliver a sensible system that actually works.

Finally, I will take more time to consider implementation of the overseas funding measures. I remain fully committed to tackling cases of interference by overseas Governments, and the wider measures in the Act will further strengthen our protections. However, I want to ensure that any new reporting requirements for providers add value without being overly burdensome. We continue to work at pace with the sector on the wider implementation of the foreign influence registration scheme. My officials are working across Government and with the sector to review our response, and I will confirm my final decision in due course.

I intend to draft a policy paper to set out these proposals in more detail and will return to the House when it is ready. Where I am returning matters to Parliament, I will keep them under review in the meantime.

Our universities are leading lights of learning. They are spaces for vigorous discussion where people of all ages, faiths and backgrounds can come together to debate new ideas. I call on universities to promote a culture of disagreeing well. There is already excellent work going on across the sector, but we must see more.

Let me be clear that students have a duty as well: to embody that spirit of debate that makes our universities great, and not to simply try to cancel any views with which they disagree. This Government will secure freedom of speech in legislation that is practical, proportionate and workable, but legislation alone will never be enough. Freedom of speech is not easy. It is not just a right, but a responsibility. If we want a culture of debate that is robust yet respectful, challenging yet considerate, and strong yet civil, we must all do our part to nurture it. The freedom of speech Act provides a legal framework, but it is up to all of us every day to build a culture of truly free speech. I commend this statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Laura Trott (Sevenoaks) (Con)]

I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of her statement. The Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 was passed by Parliament prior to the election. By the end of the Act’s passage through both Houses, the Labour party had agreed in principle with the need for it; indeed, there are positive signals coming from those on the Front Bench today. However, immediately after the election, Government sources said the Act was a Tory “hate speech charter”, and paused its implementation. I ask the Secretary of State: what has changed? Does she still stand by her characterisation of the Act?

It should have been obvious straightaway to anyone with even a basic sympathy for the norms of liberal education that pausing the Act was a mistake. It should have been clear again, when more than 650 academics signed a letter to The Times decrying the decision, that pausing the Act was a mistake, but the Secretary of State still did not budge from her position. It should have been undeniable that the Government had made the wrong choice when, acting together, no less than seven Nobel prize winners and a Fields medallist later added their names to that letter, but still Labour was happy to roll out the old tropes about hate speech. Literary luminaries like Sir Stephen Fry, Tom Holland and Ian McEwan were forced to intervene. Those with natural sympathies for the Secretary of State’s own political positions were compelled to tell her that she was wrong. It is only now, after all that humiliation, that she has finally changed her footing. I pay tribute to the academics who led that fightback outside Parliament.

Much like they have done with academies in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, this Government take a wrecking ball to policy without a thought for the consequences. They are much more interested in virtue signalling than in what is right for the country, more interested in listening to student union advisers than to women hounded out of their jobs. Since the Secretary of State decided to pause the legislation, gender-critical women, among others, have, in the process of vindicating their rights, racked up enormous legal fees that have caused some to remortgage their houses. Professor Jo Phoenix said publicly that if the Act had been enforced, it would have saved her from that very ordeal. Will the Secretary of State now apologise to those who have suffered because of her inaction?

We have upcoming legal action in the judicial review brought by the Free Speech Union against the Government’s decision. Considering that a concern about expense was one of the reasons given by the Government to justify their decision, how much has that litigation cost to defend? What is the financial cost of the Secretary of State’s inaction? How much taxpayer money has been spent on a partisan play-up-to-your-own-gallery move that is about to fall flat of its face in the court? Did the Secretary of State receive legal advice before she made her decision to suspend the Act? Will she release it, so that Members can see the basis on which she acted? If she did not, how can she possibly claim to have acted responsibly in this matter?

Despite the Secretary of State’s statement, we now have confusion about what is actually happening. It seems that the Government cannot even do a much-needed U-turn properly. Without the tort, what consequences will universities face if they do not protect free speech? Why is the Secretary of State unable to set out a clear decision on overseas funding? Why is six months not enough time? Can she spell out the changes the Government are thinking about making to the overseas funding measure? Can she confirm that none of those were discussed during the Chancellor’s recent visit to China? Can she confirm that there were no deals done to amend that section? That is very important. It is extremely poor timing at best and invidious at worst to consider changes to the overseas funding element of the Act so soon after that trip to China.

It was always obvious that the Education Secretary made a mistake in pausing the Act, but rather than commencing a little more of the Act to try to cover up the mistaken delay, she needs to get up and perform the U-turn in full. The Act contains much-needed protections and she must not abolish them just because they came from the Conservative side of the House.

Finally, while we are at it, the Secretary of State should perform a U-turn on academy freedoms too. The Government must not take six months to realise their mistake on that one.

[Bridget Phillipson]

What we inherited from the previous Government was not a genuine attempt to solve a genuine problem; it was a mess designed to put party ahead of country. We saw a misplaced fascination with headlines for themselves, rather than a serious attempt to safeguard freedom of speech and academic freedom. It is precisely because this Government care about academic freedom and freedom of speech that we are determined to get this right, unlike the Conservative party. We are not content to leave it to vice-chancellors, who have done too little for too long. Universities must be places of robust discussion, where students’ views are challenged and academic freedom is central.

One of my many predecessors in the previous Government, the former Member for Chippenham, was unable to set out how the then Government’s proposals would prevent Holocaust deniers coming on to campus. Let me be clear: Holocaust denial has no place on campus or anywhere else in our society. The legislation would have emboldened Holocaust denial, and showed a shameful disregard for the welfare of Jewish students.

On the legal proceedings the right hon. Lady mentions, she was a member of the previous Government and knows very well that I am unable to comment on any aspect of that.

I said I would consider all options. I have done precisely that and have returned to the House, as I intended, to provide an update. If Conservative Members want to know what a U-turn on free speech looks like, I suggest they turn their attention to Liz Truss, who for so long extolled the virtues of free speech and is now on some bizarre quest to cancel the Prime Minister for saying that she and the Conservative party crashed the economy. Freedom of speech cuts both ways. What a bunch of snowflakes!

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Chair of the Select Committee.

[Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for confirming the Government’s approach to the implementation of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023, and I welcome the clarity that she has provided today.

The implementation of the Act will present some challenges for universities and for students. The Secretary of State will know that there can sometimes be a fine line between free speech and hate speech, and between statements of views and opinions and incitement or encouragement to violence or intimidation in the real world. Can she assure the House that she will ensure that universities and students are absolutely clear about the limits to free speech, which are already enshrined in law, and that support will be provided on the interpretation of that when it is needed?

Professor Shitij Kapur, vice-chancellor and president of King’s College London, has said:

“Universities are not there to function as a Speakers’ Corner where anyone can stand up and express an opinion not necessarily supported by facts. If academic freedom is to mean anything, it must be accompanied by the academic obligation for ideas and claims to be accompanied by evidence and reason. Proponents have an obligation to engage and respond to those questioning their assertions and conduct that debate and discourse in a civil manner.”

How will the Secretary of State ensure—particularly as the erosion of fact-checking and moderation on social media is taking place before our very eyes—that the implementation of the Act results in a high quality of evidence-based discourse conducted in a culture of civility?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her questions and her approach, and I look forward to discussing these issues with the Select Committee in due course should its members so wish.

My hon. Friend’s point about disagreement is important. Free speech should be robust and we should be able to express our views, but all of us, especially those in public life, have a duty to ensure that we do so in a way that is responsible. As for the tort—this is at the heart of the issue that she has identified—I was concerned that the potential impact of legal proceedings and the financial consequences for providers of breaching their duties under the Act might have led to some providers unduly prioritising free speech that is hateful or degrading over the interests of those who feel harassed and intimidated. These issues can be finely balanced. We will provide further clarity through the Office for Students, but let me make it clear that academic freedom and freedom of speech are crucial tenets of our country’s history.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Ian Sollom (St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire) (LD)]

I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of her statement.

The Liberal Democrats fully support free speech, which, as several Members have pointed out, is at the heart of academic freedom, but it was clear from the start that this piece of legislation was not based on evidence, was not proportionate, and was fundamentally flawed. We welcomed the pausing of its implementation last year, and I welcome now the acknowledgement of its flaws and the Secretary of State’s move to repeal the provisions on the tort and on student unions in particular. I must, however, press her on the fundamental question of why the Act is necessary.

Higher education institutions already operate within a legal framework to ensure that freedom of speech within the law is secured for academic staff, students, employees and visiting speakers, and universities have already taken action to improve their policies and processes relating to freedom of speech. Universities UK, which represents over 140 universities, has reissued and expanded its guidance in this area, as well as having regular discussions with university leaders to support them with these challenges. Would the Secretary of State consider taking a more meaningful step to ensure that students are safe, welcome and protected at universities by giving higher education institutions a statutory duty of care for their students?

The Secretary of State also referred to the well-documented fears of minority groups, particularly those in Jewish communities, that the Act in its previous form would allow a platform for extremist views, and she mentioned Holocaust denial. We had some indication of this in her statement, but will she provide more details of her plans to protect those from minority groups and communities on our university campuses?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising those questions. I will start where we agree, and then move on to where I might disagree with him.

I agree that freedom of speech and academic freedom are essential, but, sadly, we have seen too many examples of their not being upheld in the way that they should be by universities. The right hon. Member for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott) raised a number of cases in which we have seen unacceptable practice, and some individuals have had to seek recourse through employment law when it should have been possible for them to seek redress sooner. That is precisely what we are seeking to deal with in ensuring that the Office for Students is able to focus on the most serious cases without being caught up in complex cases that could be less well founded or even nonsensical.

I want to be clear that we have engaged with people with a range of views on these topics, including those who hold gender-critical views, those who were in favour of the legislation and those who had concerns. That careful process of engagement with the sector, stakeholders and people with a range of views has enabled me to come to the House today and set out our approach.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call Mark Sewards, a member of the Education Committee.

[Mr Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)]

I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement. It is good to see that our universities will no longer be a battleground in which political parties seek to make headlines—unsuccessfully, I might add. Does she agree that now that she has taken decisive action on this issue, it is time to talk about the financial situation facing many of our universities, which threatens their very existence? We know that students are paying far more for far less at university, and we need to end that ridiculous cycle.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree with my hon. Friend that, across the board, there are big challenges in the university sector. That is why I took the difficult but necessary decision last year to increase the fees that they are able to charge. This year, we will engage in reform right across the sector to provide the long-term financial sustainability that is required. As my hon. Friend recognises, we on the Government Benches are clear that our universities are a central part of our local and regional economies, and a beacon of excellence around the world. That is why so many students from around the globe seek to come to our world-leading universities.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call Dr Caroline Johnson, a member of the Education Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)]

I respect the Secretary of State’s wish to ensure that she has considered the Act thoroughly. I regret that it has taken her so long to come to the conclusion that free speech is important, but I am glad that she has decided to bring into force many of the measures in the Act, which was introduced by the Conservatives. However, she has chosen to exclude student unions from the legislation. Can she say a bit more about how they will be held to account if they fail to keep in line with her desire to promote free speech?

[Bridget Phillipson]

On the timescale, this is a complex area, but in a little over six months we have consulted a wide range of stakeholders and considered all views, which is why I am able to return to the House today to update Members. The hon. Lady is right to say that we have decided not to commence provisions that will impose new duties on student unions. That is because some smaller providers have only a handful of members and do not have the resource or funding necessary to handle such claims, and they are already regulated by the Charity Commission. However, we fully expect student unions to protect freedom of speech, and providers to ensure that their student unions do so as well.

[Charlotte Nichols (Warrington North) (Lab)]

I welcome the careful and considered approach that the Secretary of State has taken to this issue; it stands in stark contrast to when the Act was first brought forward. I refer the shadow Secretary of State, and indeed the House, to my comments in Hansard on 13 May 2021, when the previous Secretary of State explicitly confirmed on Radio 4 that Holocaust denial would be protected speech. In that vein, does my right hon. Friend share the concern of groups such as the Union of Jewish Students and the Antisemitism Policy Trust that the draft guidelines produced by the Office for Students risked undermining existing good practice in tackling antisemitism? Will she give an assurance that the OfS will meet Jewish representative organisations to ensure that such mistakes cannot be repeated?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am confident that the OfS, as the regulator, and its director for freedom of speech will seek to engage with a range of views, including those of Jewish students and community organisations, as they take forward this important work. That is certainly something that I have done to understand the concerns and the potential impact on minority students, including Jewish students, at a time when we all sadly know that antisemitism on our campuses and streets has been rising. As a country, we must do everything in our power to tackle that.

[Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)]

This screeching U-turn is welcome and I hope that, as the shadow Secretary of State says, it heralds a new period of humility and further change by the Government. The Secretary of State said that universities must protect free speech or “face the consequences”, but as far as I can see, she has removed those consequences. Could she please lay them out for us?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I know that the right hon. Gentleman is probably used to his party engaging in these discussions on quite difficult and sensitive issues in a rather reckless and irresponsible way, but we on these Benches take our time to do this seriously and properly to make sure that we get it right, because this is such an important area. He will have heard from my speech—I will set out further detail—the requirements that will be in place through registration conditions, the fact that the Office for Students will be able to impose penalties on institutions, and the requirements that we expect of all higher education providers. My message to vice-chancellors and institutions today is that they need to do more, and they need to do it better.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Select Committee member Darren Paffey.

[Darren Paffey (Southampton Itchen) (Lab)]

I thank my right hon. Friend for her statement and for the measured, practical and common-sense approach that it takes, which is in sharp contrast to what we are hearing on the Opposition Benches at the moment. Although we will always defend their right to their opinions, a right to their own facts is rather regrettable and their revisionism is quite astounding. I know at first hand the value of a university education. It is about having our views challenged. It is about critical thinking based on evidence and facts and having our horizons opened. Does the Minister agree that this foundation and the measures announced today are the right way to secure academic freedom in the future?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend, through his background in higher education, knows all too well how essential it is that young people and students from a range of different backgrounds are exposed to views that they might not previously have heard or that they might find difficult or challenging. That is what a university education is all about, and that is what we are determined to secure and protect through the statement that I am making today.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Sir Gavin Williamson (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge) (Con)]

I thank the Secretary of State for coming to the House and setting out the revised position of the Government. I am particularly concerned about the removal of the tort, because it effectively removes the real consequences for people who disregard free speech and the consequences that could be imposed on an institution or organisation. If that is going to be the case, can she set out to the House what resources will be dedicated to the director of free speech? Let us hope this is not just a one-person fig leaf. How many people are going to be working for them? What resource will there be to ensure that free speech is protected?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to the former Secretary of State for his question. He will appreciate that this will be an independent regulator, and that there is a limit to what I can set out on their behalf. On the key issue of the tort, there will be consequences, even following the removal of the tort, for those providers who do not fulfil their duties under the Act. The OfS can already regulate providers in relation to free speech. It will be able to take regulatory action where there are breaches of the duties under the Act, including monetary penalties if needed, and the complaints scheme will enable the OfS to make recommendations to providers that they will be expected to follow. Existing routes of redress through judicial reviews and employment tribunals will remain open, but we want the OfS to focus on making sure that there is a system in place that is workable so that complaints can be dealt with swiftly.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank the Secretary of State for this statement. I think freedom of speech is really important, but it should be done in an environment of shared respect, as it is most of the time in this place. I welcome this pragmatic approach to the process. Will she confirm that the previous unworkable legislation would have added additional financial stress to institutions?

[Bridget Phillipson]

It is important that any legislation in this area is fair, proportionate and workable, and that is what we have sought to achieve through the wider engagement and consultation that has taken place since July, when I paused commencement. It is vital that we get it right. It is incredibly important, and today we have given clarity to the sector around expectations into the future.

[Mr Richard Holden (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)]

I welcome the words from the Secretary of State around freedom of speech today—she knows that I have asked about this in the House previously—and I also welcome the partial U-turn. Will she join me, though, in thanking the academics who have really put pressure on the Government to get to this position, and also the work of the Free Speech Union? Will she encourage all academic institutions to sign up to the Chicago principles? Can she give us a brief timeline on when the foreign influence registration scheme could come forward?

Finally, I will be setting up the all-party parliamentary group on freedom of speech in the coming weeks. Will the Secretary of State agree to come along and speak to us about this at some point?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am afraid I did not quite catch the very last part of the right hon. Gentleman’s questions, but I will happily look in Hansard and return to him on that point.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I think he just wants to hear a yes to attending a meeting.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am afraid I am not going to do that without having reviewed exactly what the right hon. Gentleman said, Madam Deputy Speaker. I know him quite well. The Department for Education and the Home Office are looking jointly at some of these areas, and I want to be clear that national security is our No. 1 priority as a Government. I am grateful to all those who have engaged in good faith with the Department in this conversation. They hold a wide range of views: there are those who are for the Act and those who are against, as well as those with views somewhere in the middle and those with some new ones. I am grateful for their contributions to this discussion. I hope they can all see that we have taken this seriously and that we now have a workable plan to ensure that freedom of speech and academic freedom in our institutions are protected into the future.

[Matthew Patrick (Wirral West) (Lab)]

Frank Field was a very good friend of mine. He believed deeply in seeking out disagreement with other people for a richer conversation, and in the importance of listening in good faith to arguments made in good faith. Does my right hon. Friend agree that we should see that spirit across university campuses? How will her measures ensure that that is a reality?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I think we can all learn from Frank Field, who brought wisdom to a range of areas. We can all reflect on the need to keep our views under constant review to ensure that we challenge ourselves. The chance to be educated, whether at school, college or university, is a crucial part of challenging ourselves and understanding the world in all its many forms. These measures will allow university students to have precisely that experience.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. I particularly welcome the emphasis on reducing burdens for universities, which will mean a lot to smaller institutions such as the smaller research-intensive institutions like Reading University in my constituency. Will she commit the Department to continuing to work with smaller research-intensive institutions?

[Bridget Phillipson]

Yes. One of the many brilliant aspects of our country’s higher education sector is its diversity—smaller institutions, larger ones and those that bring a wealth of difference, having evolved and changed in different ways. We will continue to listen to and work with providers and institutions of all shapes and sizes across our country.

[Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

I congratulate the shadow Secretary of State on the sheer audacity of coming to this place and pretending that hers is the party of free speech. It was her party that introduced the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Act 2014, the single largest restriction on free speech in the charity and voluntary sector, purely because the sector was saying things the then Government did not want to hear.

I encourage the Secretary of State to ignore the whines and the whinges, the gripes and the groans, of the Conservative party and carry on with what she is doing, because she is absolutely right. Universities are where people can challenge new ideas and hear things with which they may disagree. What advice is she giving to universities about the support they put in place so that students can explore these new ideas and have their own views challenged in a way that is safe and secure?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right that freedom of speech cuts both ways, and Conservative Members would sometimes do well to reflect on that, too.

Sometimes, students can be exposed to views they find challenging or difficult, especially younger students who are newly away from home, and it is right that we put in place the right support. Institutions have invested a lot in mental health support and other provision. I think this also underlines the need to turn around the provision in the national health service, because I am concerned about the extent to which providers are having to put in place additional support, above and beyond what should be a statutory requirement for every person in our country.

[Joani Reid (East Kilbride and Strathaven) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and I particularly welcome the funding for tackling antisemitism on campus, which is a well-documented problem. When the original guidance on the Act was published, it took an approach to free speech that did not take account of the limitations on freedom of expression for minority groups that arise from hate speech.

As chair of the all-party parliamentary group against antisemitism, I am particularly concerned about the risk of giving that hate implicit protection and amplification on campuses. Can the Secretary of State assure me and minority community representatives who have raised this issue with us that any future guidance will more carefully outline the importance of expression for all, including minority groups that are sometimes crowded out by loud, hateful voices?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I will ensure that my hon. Friend’s point is taken up. Many have raised very serious concerns about antisemitism on campus and its impact on Jewish students, and I can see no good reason why any university would invite a Holocaust denier on to campus to deny the overwhelming evidence. Holocaust denial is an appalling form of antisemitism.

Yesterday, I joined the Holocaust Educational Trust in Parliament to make sure that, as we come to the 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau, we redouble our efforts to fight hatred and prejudice, including antisemitism, wherever we find it in our country.

[Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)]

I declare an interest, not only as someone who has worked in the sector, but as a member of the freedom of expression organisation English PEN, which condemned the approach of the previous Government because it felt it would restrict academic freedom. Further, my constituent, who is a well-regarded economist, lost his job after publishing research into the impact of migration on coalfield communities. Will the Secretary of State assure my constituent that this Government are committed to academic freedom and to ensuring the stability of academic institutions?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I give my hon. Friend that assurance. That is also why, as one of the measures that I intend to return to, we must look again at the board and executive appointments to the Office for Students. It is right that concerns have been raised that there could be the suspicion of political interference given that, rather unusually for that kind of appointment, it involves a political appointee. People might regard that as fine if they agree with the views of the Government of the day, but I do not think that is a good principle on which we enshrine in law very important positions that are central to how we uphold academic freedom and freedom of speech in this country.

[Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement and particularly in regard to the removal of the tort from the existing legislation. That will allow our universities to ensure that funds get spent on students and not on complex legal issues.

As the Secretary of State has said repeatedly today, the Government take the need to expose students to a wide range of issues seriously. As a former academic, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether she agrees with me that our universities must remain centres of robust, rigorous debate always?

[Bridget Phillipson]

Yes, that is crucial. We know that the chance to study at university is life changing for so many students. That is of course the case for younger students—those who have what might be considered the more traditional experience of going to university at 18—but it is also about having the chance throughout life to return to education and training. That is what I have seen across so many institutions in our country. They put in place fantastic opportunities for upskilling and retraining later on in life, as people think again about how they want to go about things. I praise those institutions’ fantastic work in driving growth and innovation, and in the months to come, we will work with them to ensure they can do more.

[Laurence Turner (Birmingham Northfield) (Lab)]

May I invite the Secretary of State to respond to the following statement that was shared by the Union of Jewish Students while she was on her feet?

“We support the changes brought forward by the Secretary of State. She has listened to the concerns we and others raised and has taken action. The result is that the Act will now be less likely to damage efforts to tackle anti-Jewish racism on campus. That should be welcomed by everyone.”

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for sharing those comments. I pay tribute to the Union of Jewish Students for the amazing work it does every day to support Jewish students on campus and to ensure that their voices are heard, including at the highest levels of Government. I give my commitment to UJS that I will continue to work with it and other student groups to make sure their voice is always heard. We as a Government are resolutely behind them in the fight against antisemitism in our country.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

For the final question, I call Dr Scott Arthur.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

As someone who was an academic until about 5 am on 5 July last year, I thank the Secretary of State for her statement and for the leadership she has shown on this issue. I will ask a question in the context of my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.

I am proud of all the universities in Edinburgh and how they attract students from all over the world, but last year when I visited the Edinburgh Hebrew Congregation, which is the main synagogue in Edinburgh, I was ashamed to hear of the intimidation that Jewish students were facing in university. I was pleased to hear that universities are taking that seriously and I know that the Edinburgh faith forum is too. Freedom of speech is an important right, but that should never extend to bigotry and hate. Does the Secretary of State agree that students should be free to practise their faith, always, and able to display their faith publicly, no matter what it is, without fear of intimidation?

[Bridget Phillipson]

That is absolutely essential. The same is true for Jewish students and others from minority groups as they go about their business at school and college. Sadly, I have heard too many examples of abuse and intimidation of the sort that my hon. Friend describes. Universities must be robust places of intellectual challenge and rigour; there is no good reason why students should feel intimidated or harassed in a place where they should find comfort, challenge and support.

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Wednesday 8th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

In the week in which we return to this House and our children return to school, I am proud to be the Secretary of State for Education in a truly child-centred Government. The actions I take and the decisions I make are always in pursuit of what is best for the children of this country, and that starts with keeping them safe. After little more than six months in power, we are delivering the change that is many years overdue. No more lessons learned, no more paper pushing and no more foot dragging: it is time for Government to act, and this Government will act with the urgency that our children deserve and our country demands.

This Bill puts forward bold new measures to keep children safe. These include a new legal obligation for safeguarding partners to work hand in hand with education, because it is often teachers who first see the signs of abuse and neglect; a new duty to establish multi-agency child protection teams, because keeping children safe is everyone’s business; a new power to put in place a unique identifier for children, sharing information so that no child falls through the cracks; a new compulsory register of children not in school in every area of England, because if children are not in school, we need to know where they are; and a new requirement for local authority consent for parents to home-educate their children if they are on a child protection plan or subject to child protection inquiries. I respect parents’ rights to make choices about their child’s education, but children’s safety must always come first, and under this Government, their safety will always come first.

Let us be crystal clear: a vote against this Bill today is a vote against the safety of our children, against their childhoods and against their futures. Today, Conservative MPs have a choice: they can choose to back measures to protect children, or they can choose to chase headlines. They can choose to transform the lives of the most vulnerable young people in this country, or they can choose to sacrifice their safety for political gain. They can choose to show the public that they have finally learned the lessons of their resounding election defeat, or they can show voters that they are still unfit to govern. I want to be very clear that the conduct of politicians, be they on the Conservative Benches or anywhere else, who put the pursuit of headlines today above the safety of children tomorrow is sickening and shameful. A previous generation of Conservative politicians would not have had the slightest hesitation in saying that the conduct of today’s Opposition in seeking to block this Bill is quite simply beneath contempt.

[Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)]

The Secretary of State has mentioned previous generations of politicians, and all of us in this House must recognise that we follow in the footsteps of giants. Tony Blair, Lord Adonis and others created the academy system that was built on under the last Conservative Government and brought about a transformation of English education. Why does the Secretary of State want to dismantle decades of work by Members across this House and bring about a gross socialist uniformity that will destroy the progress that has been made?

[Bridget Phillipson]

That is simply a mischaracterisation, and the right hon. Gentleman knows it. I will come on to the wider schools measures in this Bill later in my speech, but I note that he had nothing to say in his intervention about the safety of children and the measures we are discussing today. The wrecking amendment that the Leader of the Opposition has tabled would block the very important, very serious measures that the Conservatives have been telling us for days they want to see put in place. If they want those measures, they need to support them.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

The right hon. Member for Beverley and Holderness (Graham Stuart) mentioned uniformity, but the only uniform measures I can see in the Bill are about saving parents money on uniform bills, which I think we can all welcome. Does the Secretary of State agree that the fragmentation of the school system created by the last Government led to many young people falling through the gaps, which is a huge issue?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I will come on to the wider point of collaboration later in my speech. Collaboration across the school system is crucial, but my hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the really important measures in the Bill that will put more money back in parents’ pockets by cutting the cost of school uniforms and bringing in breakfast clubs in primary schools across our country.

This is child-centred legislation through and through—legislation that backs parents to do the best for their children. This Government are on a mission to break down the barriers to opportunity, driven forward by the plan for change unveiled by the Prime Minister in December. The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill is a huge step forward in that journey of reform, starting with child safety and building from there. It is an agenda for excellence—for safe and secure childhoods, because healthy and happy futures are built on nothing less. It is an agenda for excellence—for high and rising standards, because we will accept nothing less. It is an agenda for excellence—for a top-quality core offer in all of our schools, because parents demand nothing less. It is an agenda for excellence, because every child in this country deserves nothing less. That is what mission-led government is all about: child-centred action across Departments, between professions and through partnership.

What matters about families is not the shape that they have, but the love they give. That is why, back in October, we announced the expansion of our work on fostering and on the trialling of a new kinship care allowance. It is why, in November, I came to this House to set out the biggest reform of children’s social care in a generation. It is why this Government then backed those changes with almost £300 million of investment, including the biggest ever investment in kinship care. It is why today I return to this House to cement our reforms in legislation, and to build a children’s social care system that is forward-looking, excellence-driven and child-centred.

Our first priority is to keep children with their family wherever it is safe to do so, so the Bill mandates all local authorities to offer family group decision making. With the guidance of skilled professionals, families with children at risk of falling into care will be supported to build a plan that works for them. We are strengthening support for kinship care, so that vulnerable children can live with the people they know and trust, wherever that is possible.

However, despite the best efforts of all involved, some children will inevitably need to enter care, so we must reform the system so that it works for them. I know that Members right across this House share my outrage at the excessive and exploitative profit making that we have seen from some private providers. It is shameful, it is unacceptable, and it will end.

[Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)]

I know that my right hon. Friend has a good head for numbers. Will she be doing some evaluation of the cost and benefits of investing in kinship care, so that we can reduce not just the cost to the child, but the cost to the taxpayer of expensive child social care?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. In my time with her on the Public Accounts Committee, I learned all too well the importance of those principles. The previous Government had work under way on understanding not just the benefits for children of staying close to those who can care for them best, but the spiralling costs and the need to take action. However, what we did not see from that Government was action, and that is why we are today making sure that we deliver better for our children.

This Bill gives the Government, through the Secretary of State, the power to introduce a profit cap. Providers should take note: we will not hesitate to use this power to protect our most vulnerable children. Children must always have somewhere to live if private providers unexpectedly collapse. That is why this Bill introduces a new financial oversight scheme to increase transparency and strengthen forward planning. Children need support when they leave care, too, so the Bill will require all local authorities to offer care leavers emotional and practical support through the Staying Close programme—support in finding a great place to live, support in accessing the right services at the right time, and support in going on to live a healthy, happy life.

The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill provides the safe and secure foundation that all children need, and it builds on that foundation with urgent reform to all our schools, so that every child can achieve and thrive. That means schools being at the beating heart of their communities. That is why this Bill legislates for free breakfast clubs in every state-funded primary school, so that children get a welcoming, softer start to the day. It means schools where children come together to eat, learn and grow. It is good for attendance, good for attainment and good for behaviour.

[Steve Witherden (Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr) (Lab)]

Before my election, I spent nearly 20 years as a secondary school teacher, seeing at first hand the devastating effects of food poverty on children’s health, concentration and academic performance. I welcome the introduction of free breakfast clubs in primary schools, which will improve child health and learning outcomes in England, as seen in Wales. However, I urge further action to ensure that all children can thrive. Will the Government consider extending free breakfasts to secondary school students, and will consideration be given to access to free school lunches as well?

[Bridget Phillipson]

We will of course always keep further action under review. Through the child poverty taskforce, which I co-chair the Work and Pensions Secretary, we are considering what further action is required to make sure that families have more money in their pockets and can increase their income, and will take action. The growing number of children we have seen in poverty in our country is a source of national shame, and Conservative Members are responsible for that record.

School uniform is important for building a sense of community, but too many families tell us that the cost remains a heavy burden, so our Bill limits the number of branded items that schools can require pupils to have, putting money back in parents’ pockets.

I want children in school and ready to learn, and that is why the Government’s plan for change sets a milestone for record numbers of five-year-olds reaching a good level of development. That is vital for giving every child the best start in life, but that is just the beginning, because I want high and rising standards for every child in every school. That is one of the surest ways that we can break the link between background and success for millions of children. That matters for every child, not just a lucky few. Life should not come down to luck. When Governments forget that, it is not the children of Conservative Members who lose out; it is working-class kids across our country. I know that better than most, and I will take no lectures from the Conservative party on what it takes to deliver better life chances for working-class kids.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

Reported figures for 2022 and 2023 show an increase in the proportion of children living in low-income families, and no change in the proportion of children living in absolute low-income families. Does the Secretary of State agree that the Bill will improve the household finances of families and the life chances of children in my constituency of Wolverhampton West?

[Bridget Phillipson]

Absolutely. The Bill will put hundreds of pounds back into family finances and back into parents’ pockets by cutting the cost of school uniform, and by introducing breakfast clubs in every state-funded primary school. However, we recognise that there is so much more we need to do, because child poverty scars the life chances of far too many in our country.

[Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind)]

Could the Secretary of State comment on the falling rolls in some parts of this country, particularly London? Most local authorities unfortunately take the option of closing schools, which is very damaging to children and to local communities. Clause 50 appears to give her some powers of intervention, so we could perhaps instead downsize such schools, which would mean we kept the sense of them being community schools. That is so important, particularly in the poorest parts of many London boroughs. Can she give us some hope that there will be intervention, so that we keep community schools?

[Bridget Phillipson]

A number of provisions in the Bill deal precisely with that challenge. We recognise that in London—but shortly this will be the case right across our country—there are challenges that come with falling rolls and making sure that we manage that properly. That will require schools to work with local councils, and to collaborate on managing admissions and place planning. It will also require decisions on how we make best use of the schools estate. That is why we have started encouraging primary schools to bid to open primary-based nurseries. The recent pilot programme for that has closed, and we were delighted to see so many applications. There is also an opportunity to think about using the space that will open up as a result of falling rolls to create additional provision for children with special educational needs and disabilities, so that they can go to a school much closer to home, and can go to school with their friends, in their local community.

There has been welcome consensus that a high-quality state education should be the right of all children. That consensus has helped to ensure that innovations—from Ofsted to the national curriculum and academies—have stood the test of time, as Governments of all parties have driven reform. Academies, introduced by the last Labour Government and expanded by the Conservative party, have been instrumental in raising standards in our school system. They have delivered brilliant results, particularly for the most disadvantaged children, and they will continue their record of excellence under this Labour Government. However, this consensus must not stifle progress. While the Conservative party did make some progress over the past 14 years, it must reckon with its many failures. For example, one in four children leaves primary school without meeting the expected standard in reading, writing and maths. Tens of thousands of children do not secure good maths or English GCSEs. One in five children is regularly absent from school; they are unable to learn if they are not there, and hold back their classmates when they return. There are also hundreds of thousands of children in schools that perform poorly year after year.

Protecting the foundations should not mean that we do not build on them. After a decade of stagnation—I say a decade because Conservative Members will remember a time when they had an Education Secretary who was determined to deliver reform—now is the time to press on and, once again, deliver for our children. Members will see in the Bill a respect for the fundamentals, twinned with the drive to go further and deliver high and rising standards for each and every child. We inherited a system that was too fragmented, and that too often incentivised harmful competition over helpful collaboration.

[Victoria Collins (Harpenden and Berkhamsted) (LD)]

The Secretary of State gives a lot of important statistics about how our children are developing, but their mental health and wellbeing is also important. Will she consider a national wellbeing measurement, so we can look at improving the wellbeing of our children?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I welcome the hon. Lady’s interest in this area, because I share her concern about the growing number of children in our country who are deeply unhappy, and the growing challenge of mental ill health and ensuring wellbeing. Far too many children do not receive access to timely support, and we are looking carefully at the issue that she identifies.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

On children’s welfare and making sure that children start the school day in the best position to learn, I thank my right hon. Friend for bringing forward plans for breakfast clubs, so that children are ready to learn, not only because they have had a good meal, but because they are eased into the school day. Does she agree that that will help young children, and particularly kids with special educational needs, to learn?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree with my hon. Friend. We have been led by the evidence on this, which is clear: this measure provides real support to parents at the start of the school day, but also delivers benefits for children’s learning, development, academic outcomes and behaviour. I am delighted that in April we will start rolling out the first pilot across schools, including schools serving children with special educational needs and disabilities, demonstrating the difference that this Labour Government will make to children’s life chances.

[Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)]

I am sure that all Members of the House share the right hon. Lady’s objective of ensuring that children get the best education and have the best educational outcomes possible, but why is she dismantling the infrastructure that has delivered improvements? We have specialist schools, schools able to attract the best teachers, and schools able to tailor their curriculum to their pupils. Why does she want to dismantle that, if she wants to improve educational standards?

[Bridget Phillipson]

That is just not the case. I invite him to read the Bill, and I will come on to further measures that we are proposing.

If we believe that every child deserves the best, that every classroom deserves a top teacher, and that every state school must be a great school, we cannot have excellence for some children and “just fine” or “okay” for the rest. We need all schools, working together, to deliver a national, high-quality core offer for all children, and to have the flexibility to innovate beyond that, so that parents know that wherever they live and whatever their local school, this Government are their child’s greatest champion. The best schools and trusts do incredible work, day in, day out, and I pay tribute to them. They are engines of innovation and civic leaders, and collaboration and improvement are central to their success. They prove that excellence already exists in the system, and it is time to spread it to all schools.

That does not mean no competition. Competition can be healthy and a spur to excellence, but competition that encourages schools to hoard best practice or to export problems to others must be replaced by collaboration, and by schools working together to solve problems and put children first. I do not just mean collaboration within trusts. True collaboration also looks outward, so that there are schools driven by a shared purpose embedded in communities. Our vision twins that deep collaboration with healthy competition, so that every child in every school can benefit from best practice.

The Bill brings reform. It demands high and rising standards across the board. We will restore the principle established by the noble Lord Baker, which is that every child will benefit from the same core national curriculum, following the curriculum and assessment review. The national curriculum was a Conservative achievement—I benefited from it—and this Labour Government will bring that legacy back for every child, giving every parent the confidence in standards that they deserve. Every child will be taught by an excellent, qualified teacher who has undertaken statutory induction. That will be supported by giving every school the flexibility to create attractive pay and condition offers to recruit and retain excellent teachers, and by backing those schools already doing that to keep it going.

[Esther McVey (Tatton) (Con)]

I agree, as would all Members, that we want excellent standards for all schools. One idea that the Conservative Government had was that if a school was failing, new management would go in to increase standards, yet the Secretary of State wants to dismantle that. I would call that vandalism of our education system.

[Bridget Phillipson]

No; I invite the right hon. Lady to look carefully at the measures in the Bill. We will not hesitate to intervene in failing schools—indeed, we will intervene a lot sooner than the Conservatives did in schools that are coasting. Those schools that fall short of the statutory level of intervention will see regional improvement teams in their schools driving up standards.

Where there is failure in the system, or where schools are not delivering the standards that every child deserves, we will act. That action will always be guided by what is best for the children in those schools. That may well be academisation, or it may be targeted intervention to drive change in practice and drive up standards, rather than to change the structure. The Bill will convert the duty to issue academy orders into the power to better deliver high and rising standards for all children, strengthening the range of ways through which failure can be tackled. There can be no excuse for fixating on structures and not on standards, because what matters is what works.

The Bill ends the presumption that new schools should be academies, giving local authorities the freedom to deliver the schools that their communities need. That includes the ability to open new special schools—something that Members across the House know is a major challenge. This Government will work tirelessly to make sure that all children with special educational needs and disabilities receive the support they need to achieve and thrive. The previous Government left that in the “too difficult” box, but we will tackle it and ensure that all our children get a great education.

[Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)]

The Secretary of State mentions special schools, and Members across the Chamber will have postbags filled with letters about far too many children who are not getting the support they need with their mental health, whether at special schools or otherwise. Will she consider putting a mental health professional in all our schools, including special schools, so that our children’s wellbeing can be improved, including their mental health?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I share the hon. Lady’s concern about the mental health challenges that many of our young people are experiencing, and we are committed to rolling out mental health support right across our schools. On the wider challenge of support for children with special educational needs and disabilities, I wish to make clear to the House that the reform we must engage in, and the change required, is complex and will take time. I invite Members across the House—the Liberal Democrats and others—to work with us on the change that is required to get this right, because for far too long children with special educational needs and disabilities have been failed by this system. Parents have lost trust and confidence in it, and it is bankrupting local councils.

[Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)]

My right hon. Friend has spoken about academies and various other forms of schools. Will she confirm that nothing in the Bill would result in a teacher in any school getting a pay cut?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend brings a wealth of experience as a teacher to the House. I know that teachers will want to hear what this will mean for their pay, so I reiterate that the measures in the Bill and the changes that we will bring forward to the schoolteachers’ pay and condition documents in the following remit will not cut teachers’ pay.

[James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)]

The Secretary of State has spoken about her focus on standards. The free schools programme has driven up standards across the country, so why was one of her first actions to threaten 44 free school projects developed by parents, pupils and communities? Will she lift the veil of uncertainty over them?

[Bridget Phillipson]

We are looking carefully at all the schools in the pipeline, but we need to ensure that in every case there is a strong case for the need for the school and good value for the taxpayer. We have inherited an enormous challenge when it comes to the public finances, and we have had to make difficult decisions because of the £22 billion black hole that the hon. Member and his party left behind. [Interruption.] The right hon. Member for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott), who is chuntering away, was in Cabinet as Chief Secretary to the Treasury and responsible for overseeing all of that.

Returning to support for children with special educational needs and disabilities, we will improve inclusivity in mainstream schools while ensuring that specialist provision can cater for those with the most complex needs.

The changes that the Bill brings are underpinned by our wider reforms to drive improvement. New school report cards will give a full picture of a school’s performance. New RISE—regional improvement for standards and excellence—teams will draw on the excellence in our system and bring schools together to spread good practice and challenge underperformance. Accountability and inspection should be a galvanising force for improvement and a catalyst for quality, raising the floor of success, not lowering the ceiling of ambition. It should not drag schools down but lift children up. It is about them—it is always about them.

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

I am grateful for my right hon. Friend’s speech, and not least for the opportunity to raise standards for children with disability, children experiencing anxiety and children who have got care experience. Will she look at the role that local authorities can play in building collaboration and ensure that they have the funding they need? The last Government hollowed them out, yet they have a crucial role in raising standards and supporting schools.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree with my hon. Friend that we need to ensure that local authorities are working with schools, health services and other partners in their areas. Through the last Budget, we were able to deliver additional investment for our local councils. We want to see a much greater focus and priority on early help and early support and prevention, because we know that that is where we can make the biggest difference to children’s lives.

[Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)]

Will the Secretary of State give way?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I will give way a final time and then conclude.

[Richard Tice]

I was chair of governors of the 15th academy, and in 2008 I welcomed Sir Tony Blair to that academy in Northampton to show him the benefits of the freedoms for governors to act with regard to the national curriculum, with regard to pay and conditions, and with regard to innovation. I think that Sir Tony Blair and Lord Adonis will be horrified by these changes, which will restrict the freedoms to innovate and to improve. It is a great shame.

[Bridget Phillipson]

That is a total misunderstanding of the Bill. The hon. Gentleman should not seek to speak for others in this regard. We are restoring academies to their core intended purpose of driving up standards for the most disadvantaged children in our country, with innovation spread wherever we can do that.

[Helena Dollimore (Hastings and Rye) (Lab/Co-op)]

I really welcome the measures in the Bill to ensure that the many children being home-schooled have all the support they need to get back into mainstream education. I was extremely concerned to find out that in the last academic year, 800 children in Hastings were being home-schooled—that is one in 16 children, or 27 classrooms of children. While there will be parents providing a good-quality education at home, I know from speaking to teachers and to local shops who see these children in their establishments that some are not necessarily getting a good education. We need to get those children back into school.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree with my hon. Friend. I recognise the challenge that she faces in her constituency and that we see right across our country. We have seen a big increase in the number of children being home-educated. While I respect the right of parents to make that choice—there is a complex range of reasons why many parents are now making that decision, and there are questions about how we support our children with their mental health and wider challenges on the SEND system—let me be absolutely clear to the House that all children not in school, when they are being home-educated, must have a good level of education. We cannot allow the situation to continue where we do not have visibility of where children are and they slip between the cracks. We will ensure through the Bill that when a child protection investigation is under way or there is a child protection plan, local authorities will be able to decline that request from parents, because we all sadly know what can go terribly wrong when we fail to step in and protect children.

[Graham Stuart]

On that issue, will the Secretary of State give way?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am afraid that I am concluding now.

We are bringing together the system’s many parts into a collaborative, coherent whole with children at its heart. Our ambition to support children does not stop here. We expect to bring forward further legislation when parliamentary time allows. Our work to erase the stain of child poverty must and will continue through the child poverty taskforce, which I am proud to co-chair with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.

Reducing the burden on schools, freeing teachers to teach and children to learn—today is about action. When colleagues from across the House read the Bill in all its detail, they will find running through its 60 clauses one golden thread, one common theme, one objective, one common cause. It is not structures or ideology, and they will find no pet projects or stale dogma. They will see that our focus is firmly on children: their life chances are the aim, their protection is the objective and their success is our common cause. This Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill is written for them. It is introduced to the House for them. It will be implemented for them—for their safety, for their schooling and for their futures. I commend the Bill to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.