Giving Every Child the Best Start in Life
Debate between Bridget Phillipson and Judith Cummins(1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)
With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement on this Government’s vital work to change our country for good by giving every child the best start in life.
The focus today is firmly on our youngest children, but the impact will be much more broader. This Government are building a stronger, fairer society, and we will lay the foundations for it in the earliest years of our children’s lives. Because we are determined to tackle the root causes of problems, not just the symptoms, we begin at the start.
The inequalities that stain our country and the ways in which opportunity is heaped on some but hidden from others are disparities that do not suddenly spring up in adulthood. Our babies are born into an unequal world, and the inequality grows with them, right from the very first days when we carry them home from hospital.
Early differences in the support that families can get, in the early education and childcare that parents can access, and in the opportunities that children have to start exploring are all differences—these and many more—that take hold early on. The winds of fortune are already there on the first day of school—a gale at the backs of some; a blizzard in the faces of others. These differences mean that some children arrive in the classroom not yet ready to learn. They mean that while two thirds of children reach a good level of development by age five, a third do not. Half of our children on free school meals miss that important milestone, and this injustice is fuelled by those differences.
A Labour Government will not tolerate our children being failed like this. Within months of taking office, we set out in our plan for change our ambition to get a record share of children to reach a good level of development by the age of five, because it matters so much for those young lives. Our plan goes further—it sets the tone. Forty per cent of the disadvantage gap at the age of 16 is already there at the age of five.
Next month, we know that young people across the country will pick up their exam results. Some will do well, but sadly some others will be disappointed, and those results-day stories of smiles and frowns for our young people begin to be written in the first years of their lives, so if we want to build an education system where every child can achieve and thrive, if we want to grow a society where the opportunity to get on is open to all, and if we want to deliver the change that the country so desperately needs, we have to focus on the early years. We have to give every child the best start in life. That is where my priority as Education Secretary lies, and that is why, just 12 months after entering government, I am proud to be here today to set out our “best start in life” strategy, which we are determined will change the country for good.
Giving every child the best start in life begins with families. Becoming a parent or a carer is full of joy and wonder, but we all know that it can sometimes be hard—and it can feel isolating, too—so parents and carers need to know that they can tap into a community of support. They need to know that they are not alone, but we are falling short. One in four families with children under five struggle to get trusted advice; for families on low incomes, it is one in three.
It was not always like that. There was a time when Government cared deeply about children’s development. Members across the House will know all about Sure Start, the quiet revolution in the lives of our children carried out by the last Labour Government. Sure Start was one of the proudest achievements of that Labour Government, and I am proud today to build on its legacy. We remember all the good it did for our children, for our communities and for our country. Sure Start raised exam results and reduced hospitalisations. It improved early identification, boosted physical health and boosted mental health. It reached disadvantaged families and made a difference to their lives.
Sure Start was a triumph. Of course, it was not perfect —no programme ever is—but it worked in so many ways and for so many families, and never more so that when it stuck to its principles and brought together the excellent services that parents need. At the heart of its success were the children’s centres: one-stop shops where families knew where they could go for help; a comforting and consistent offer of support all in one place. There are many ways in which 14 years of Conservative Government damaged our country and our society, but the vandalism they inflicted on the lives of our youngest children—tearing these services out of communities, deepening inequalities and abandoning families—should never be forgotten. Today, the Government will right that terrible wrong and restore hope to families.
Our Best Start service will honour the proud legacy of Sure Start. Today’s Labour Government stand on the shoulders of those who went before, but we do so to look forward to the better future our children deserve, not back to the past. That is how we will deliver for a new generation of families.
We will introduce a new Best Start family service delivered through Best Start family hubs: the first step to a national family service that ensures that families can get the right support for their children from conception to age five, giving parents the freedom to focus on loving their children. This morning, we announced the national year of reading for 2026. We want to give parents more time to read with their children, to grow a love of learning that starts in the home and flows throughout a child’s life.
Best Start family hubs will be open to all, rooted in disadvantaged communities. They will work with nurseries, childminders, schools, health services, libraries and local voluntary groups—a whole community coming together around one goal: to give children the best possible start in life. Our Best Start digital service means that we are ready for the future, linking families to their local Best Start family hubs and exploring how the power of artificial intelligence can help parents find the right information.
We will also make early education and care more affordable and easier to access. From the day the Government won the backing of the people, we set about delivering the entitlement of 30 hours of Government-funded childcare a week for working families, backed by funding reaching £9 billion from next year. Last July, we inherited a pledge without a plan, but the Government are delivering on our promise to parents, because I know how much it matters that promises made are promises kept to the future of our country and to the trust between families and their Government. The cost of childcare will no longer price parents out of the jobs they love; instead, they will have the choice and freedom to work the hours they want and an average of £7,500 a year back in their pockets.
I thank all those who are working with us to drive that change, from private nurseries to school-based ones, group-based providers, childminders, dedicated professionals, and early years educators who are transforming life chances. Almost £370 million was provided by the Chancellor in the spending review, and we are building and expanding more nurseries in primary schools, with the first of the 6,000 extra places coming from September this year. Soon enough, 80% of childcare in this country will be Government-backed.
The message is clear: this Labour Government are on the side of families. The Labour party is the party of family. That means that childcare must be better linked to educational priorities, better geared to closing attainment gaps, and better focused on all our children succeeding at school. Our early years educators are too often the hidden heroes of our communities. It is past time that we backed them, so we will raise the status of our workforce. There will be a new professional register, because working in early years is just that: a profession. There will be more high-quality training for staff, guided by the golden thread of the best evidence, and we will train more early years teachers, because we know the difference that they make to our young ones.
Our stronger practice hubs will double in number, and we will offer new financial incentives to attract and keep great early years teachers in the nurseries that serve the most disadvantaged communities. Every child deserves a great education and a great start in life, and that must extend to our children with special educational needs and disabilities. Early intervention can work wonders to lower barriers to learning, so under this Government, inclusive practice will become standard practice.
This Government are driving a decade of national renewal, but there can be no decade of renewal for our country without a decade of renewal for our children. This is urgent, because children only get one chance. If opportunities are missed, parents do not get what they need. If that great nursery down the road has not been built yet, that is it—there is no going back. For 14 years, children’s lives marched on as services were ripped away. I will not stand by and watch as more and more children are let down. Through this strategy, I am bringing change—change for all our families, all our communities, and above all, our children. It is for them that our strategy was written, and it is for them that we will see it through, so that we give each and every child, from their first day in this world, the best start in life. I commend this statement to the House.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
Bridget Phillipson
Every time I come here to announce the positive changes that a Labour Government are bringing, whether it is free breakfast clubs, school-based nurseries or our “best start in life” strategy, what is the right hon. Lady’s response? The same confected outrage, the same negativity, and the same petty point scoring. She has no plan or vision for the future of our education system, and for giving our children the best start in life, which they deserve. The Conservatives can talk all they want, after 14 years in government, about what they put in an unsuccessful manifesto, but it came with a post-dated cheque if ever there was one. The British people rightly judge their politicians not on what they claim they will do, but on what they actually deliver, and it is on that basis that this Government will be judged.
The right hon. Lady asked a number of detailed questions about what we are delivering. We are trebling investment in Best Start family hubs across the spending review period. All the detail is there for her to see in the many documents that have been published with the spending review, and in the strategy that we published today. This is additional investment that we are putting into supporting our youngest children, because this Labour Government prioritise the early years and want to make sure that all our children get the best start in life. The only policy that the right hon. Lady has is to cut budgets in state schools and hand a tax break to private schools. That is it. [Interruption.]
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
Order. I certainly want to listen to what the Secretary of State for Education has to say.
Bridget Phillipson
The right hon. Lady asks about the needs of children with special educational needs and disabilities. I would say to all parents of children with SEND that there is no responsibility I take more seriously than our responsibility to some of the most vulnerable children in our country. We will ensure as a Government that children get better access to more and strengthened support with a much sharper focus on early intervention. We are investing more in support for children with SEND; there is the extra £1 billion at the Budget, £740 million for more places, and better training and support for staff working with children with SEND.
No group suffered more under the last Government than children with SEND. A degree of humility on the right hon. Lady’s part is well overdue. This is a serious and complex area that the Government are determined to get right. The Conservatives ducked the difficult decisions and failed to put in place the support needed, to the extent that the previous Education Secretary described the system as “lose, lose, lose”.
This Government will ensure that all our children get the best start in life, including children with SEND. Through the schools White Paper, which will come out later this year, we will ensure that all our children, including those with SEND, get better outcomes. We will step up and deliver the change that our children need, and will ensure through our “best start in life” strategy that families once again get early support, timely intervention, access to healthcare, and the chance to speak with other parents about the challenges and joys of parenting. I am so proud that in the first year of the Labour Government, we are delivering more than the Conservatives achieved in 14 years.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call the Chair of the Select Committee.
Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)
I warmly welcome the statement from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on restoring a comprehensive and strategic approach to early years support, childcare and early education—an approach that has sadly been lacking during the 14 years of the last Government. In that time, we saw Sure Start dismantled, the cost of childcare soar, and the absence of any focus at all on quality or addressing the disadvantage gap.
I welcome the commitment that there will be a SEND co-ordinator in every Best Start family hub. Given the shortage of SENDCOs in schools, what are the Secretary of State’s plans for the training and recruitment of this workforce, and what qualification will they have? How is she working with colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care on the wider challenges in the workforce for educational psychologists and speech and language therapists?
I welcome the approach to inclusion in early years. My right hon. Friend will know that there are huge differences in the approaches to inclusion taken by different providers. How will individual settings be held to account on inclusivity under this strategy?
Finally, my right hon. Friend will know that there is huge expertise and quality in our maintained nursery schools across the country, but many are struggling with significant financial deficits. What role does she envisage for maintained nursery schools in this new strategy, and how will they be helped to be sustainable?
Bridget Phillipson
I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Chair of the Select Committee for her detailed questions, and for the welcome she has given the strategy. I would be more than happy to discuss all the areas with her in more detail, because I appreciate that time is often short here, Madam Deputy Speaker.
We want to ensure high-quality training and support for all staff working across our education system, but my hon. Friend is right that we will have a SEND trained professional in every Best Start family hub, because the evidence from Sure Start was clear about the importance of early identification of need, aligned with better parenting support and wider health service access, so we will deliver that.
Maintained nurseries have an incredible role to play, given the expertise that they can share across the system, and we are considering further steps to support them in sharing and building on that expertise. As my hon. Friend will know, maintained nurseries often have a large number of children with SEND in their settings, and we think there is a lot we can do around inclusion there, too. On inclusion across the board, there is an important role for the revised Ofsted framework in ensuring that all schools and education settings are genuinely inclusive.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Bridget Phillipson
The hon. Lady asks a number of questions and I am grateful for her broad welcome for the intent of this Government to make sure that all of our children get the best start in life. On early years, she will know that as of next year we are investing £9 billion into the system along with a near-doubling of the early years pupil premium. That goes hand in hand with the £75 million expansion grant to support the sector ahead of the September further expansion. In addition, we are working across Government, as the strategy sets out, on how we might consider simplification of funding and how we can make sure it is working as intended for both providers and for parents. I would of course be happy to discuss further issues on that with the hon. Lady. As she said, the Minister for early years education, my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan), met Genevieve’s family and the hon. Member for Cheadle (Mr Morrison) last week.
To answer directly the question on Ofsted, from next April Ofsted will inspect new early years providers within 18 months of opening and will move towards inspecting all providers at least once every four years, compared with six years currently, alongside there being additional investment to strengthen quality assurance and inspector training to make sure that all children are safe, loved and protected. I also join with the hon. Lady in sending my condolences to the families affected.
“For Women Scotland” Supreme Court Ruling
Debate between Bridget Phillipson and Judith Cummins(2 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Bridget Phillipson
My hon. Friend is right. This is about dignity and compassion for all, and that is an important message that I think we should all take out from this House.
David Smith (North Northumberland) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for her clear and positive response to the Supreme Court’s ruling. Like her, before I was elected to this place, I ran a north-east-based homelessness charity for eight years. I have to say, contrary to what we have heard in some of the debate in the last few days and even in this place today, it is almost always possible to find a solution that allows us to support people on a single-sex basis and those who identify as transgender. In the last eight years of running that charity, I was not helped by the total lack of clarity from the Conservative Government. Does the Minister agree that it is important to reaffirm that in the Equality Act, trans people remain protected from discrimination under the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, and that the Supreme Court ruling is focused on clarifying protections, based on the protected characteristic of sex, that have always existed in the Equality Act?
Higher Education Regulatory Approach
Debate between Bridget Phillipson and Judith Cummins(5 months, 4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
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.
Higher Education Reform
Debate between Bridget Phillipson and Judith Cummins(8 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)
With permission, I would like to make a statement about the future of our higher education sector and the changes that we will be making for students in the upcoming academic year, 2025-26.
Before I go further, I want to make clear the approach that this Labour Government take to our universities and, above all, to the students whose education is their central purpose, because the Conservative Government did not just talk down universities; they talked down the aspirations of working-class families across our country, and they dismissed the ambition of our young people and undermined their opportunities. This Government take a different approach. We are determined to break down the barriers to opportunity, and higher education is central to that mission.
Higher education is part of what makes our country great. It enriches our culture, powers our economy and sustains intellectual traditions stretching back centuries. It is a beacon of opportunity—to students not just from this country, but from across the world—and a sector of which everyone in this House ought to be proud. But when this Government took office in July, we found a university sector facing severe financial challenges. With tuition fees frozen for the last seven years, universities have suffered a significant real-terms decline in their income. We also found a regulator subject to political whim, unable to focus on the challenges our universities face. A succession of Conservative Ministers faced with tough decisions had, for year after year, ducked them time and again.
We inherited in our universities, as across so much of our public sector, the consequences of long years of shameful abdication of responsibility: long years in which I heard too often from students of the gap between the course they were promised and the experience they had, about the trouble they had making ends meet as they worked hard not merely at their studies but often at two or more jobs on top; long years in which I saw the amazing research our universities deliver but how infrequently those triumphs drove wider success; and long years in which I heard from international students, who make such an important contribution to our country, that the previous Government had made them feel neither valued nor welcomed. That is the mess that Opposition Members left behind, but where the Conservatives shirked the hard choices, this Government have not hesitated to grip the challenges we face and take the tough decisions to restore stability to higher education, to fix the foundations and to deliver change.
We have accepted in full the recommendations of the independent review of the Office for Students. We have also brought new leadership to the office and refocused its work to monitor universities’ finances and to hold leadership to account. I thank Sir David Behan for his work both leading the independent review and now as its interim chair. We have paused the commencement of the last Government’s freedom of speech legislation while we consider the impacts on universities, students and the regulator, because although universities must be home to robust discussion and rigorous challenge, regulation must also be workable.
I am here today to make two sets of announcements on higher education reform, addressing the challenges our students and universities face, and gripping these issues as a responsible Government. First, we will fix the foundations. We will secure the future of higher education so that students can benefit from a world-class education for generations to come. That is why I am announcing that, in line with the forecasts set out in the Budget last week, from April 2025 we will be increasing the maximum cap for tuition fees in line with inflation to £9,535—an increase of £285 per academic year.
I understand that some students may worry about the impact that the increase will have on their loan debt, so I want to reassure students already at university that when they start repaying their loan, they will not see higher monthly repayments as a result of these changes to fee and maintenance loans. That is because student loans are not like consumer loans; monthly repayments depend on earnings, not simply the amount borrowed or interest rates, and at the end of any loan term, any outstanding loan balance, including interest built up, will be written off.
Increasing the fee cap has not been an easy decision, but I want to be crystal clear that this will not cost graduates more each month as they start to repay their loans. Universities are responsible for managing their own finances and must act to remain sustainable, but Members across the House will agree that it is no use keeping tuition fees down for future students if the universities are not there for them to attend, nor if students cannot afford to support themselves while they study. I therefore confirm that we will boost support for students with living costs by increasing maximum maintenance loans in line with inflation, giving them an additional £414 a year in ’25-26. I also confirm that from the start of the ’25-26 academic year a lower fee limit of £5,760 will be introduced for foundation years in classroom-based subjects such as business, social science and humanities. The Government recognise the importance of foundation years for promoting access to higher education, but they can be delivered more efficiently in classroom-based subjects, at a lower cost to students.
The change that the Government are bringing about must go further, so my second set of announcements signals the start of deeper change for our students, our universities and our country. Today, I will set out the scale of our ambition to build a higher education system fit for the challenges not just of today but of tomorrow. In the months ahead, we will publish our proposals, because in universities, as across our public services, investment can come only with the promise of major reform. The contribution of higher education to our economy, our communities and our country must grow and strengthen. That begins with universities doing more to spread opportunity to disadvantaged students, in both expanding access and improving outcomes. Our most recent data shows why. The gap between disadvantaged students and their peers in progression to university by age 19 is the highest on record. I will not tolerate that shameful divide any longer. Universities can and must do more, and they must rise to the huge challenge of technological change, supporting adults with the flexibility that they need to retrain. That is why we confirmed in the Budget that we are pressing ahead with the lifelong learning entitlement.
While the UK is home to many world-class universities, it is time that all students in higher education in this country feel the benefit. It is time to raise the bar further on teaching standards, to improve our world-leading reputation and drive out poor practice, and it is time to ensure that all students get good value for money, which, if we are honest, has not always been the case in the past. Furthermore, universities must do more to raise their impact beyond their gates. They must do more to drive the growth that this country sorely needs by attracting talent from around the world, joining with Skills England, employers and partners in further education to deliver the skills that people and businesses need, and shaping world-class research to create good jobs across the country. Members across the House will know how important universities can be for the areas that surround them—not just local economies but local communities. I want universities to work harder to embed themselves in those local communities, as civic anchors—the beating heart of local life in our towns and cities—not ivory towers far from local concerns.
Lying beneath those challenges must be a further transformation: a renewed drive for efficiency. Students and taxpayers support the costs of our universities. They are right to expect that every penny is spent effectively. We will not accept wasteful spending. Universities must rise to the challenge, which means ensuring that the pay of their top teams is fair and justifiable. I am determined that our world-class higher education sector does not merely survive in the years ahead but thrives, supporting students in every corner of our country and at every stage of their lives. I am determined that our universities become all that I know they can be. The scale of our ambition demands a new approach, rooted in partnership, so I look forward to partnering with the sector, the Office for Students and UK Research and Innovation. I will work closely with Ministers across Government, in particular the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, to deliver a reformed and strengthened higher education system for our country.
As today the Government look to the future, I am reminded that more than 60 years have passed since the Robbins report on higher education was presented to this House, with its famous principle
“that courses of higher education should be available for all those who are qualified by ability and attainment to pursue them and who wish to do so.”
That principle drove the expansion of higher education over the decades that followed, under successive Governments of both parties. It is central to the thinking of this Government today. That is why responsible Governments must treat universities not as a political battleground but as a public good. It is why Government Members want to see the continued success of our young people, and it is why we are determined to ensure the sustainability and success of our higher education sector, not just in the years ahead but for decades to come. I commend this statement to the House.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
Bridget Phillipson
Amid the faux outrage that we just heard from the shadow Education Secretary, I did not hear whether she will support the measure. She, like her party for many months during the election campaign, had nothing to say other than doing down the ambition and aspiration of young people and their families who want the opportunity to go on to university. The Conservatives went into the last election determined to ensure that fewer young people had the chance to go to university. That is shameful, and it is something that Labour will never back. Young people with talent and ambition, and their families, want a Government who recognise it.
It is little wonder that, at the ballot box on 4 July, the right hon. Lady’s party got a clear message. It is just a shame that in the time since, there has been no reflection on why that was. The Conservatives have learned nothing from their years of failure. They ducked the tough decisions for years. I make it absolutely clear to the House that I do not take any pleasure in this decision—it is not one that I want to take—but I am determined to secure the long-term financial sustainability of our world-leading universities. She is right to recognise their success. They are beacons around the world, and that necessitates tough decisions—decisions that she and her colleagues in the Treasury ducked year after year. They put a Conservative peer in to chair what should have been an independent regulator. They picked fights with the sector time and again, and over the course of 10 years, the Conservative party never had a serious plan to reform the higher education sector. I am determined to bring that reform, and in the months to come we will set out further plans to reform efficiency, access and participation for our young people.
To answer the precise questions that the right hon. Lady asked, as we lay legislation before the House, we will publish an impact assessment alongside it.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call the Chair of the Education Committee.
Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)
First, let me put it on the record that I am the parent of a young person in her first year at university.
The Secretary of State has set out very clearly the case for our universities and the justification for her announcement today. However, as young people who might be applying for university as the announcement is being made might see only the headlines, what steps is she taking to ensure that it is communicated effectively, so that it does not deter young people from low and middle-income backgrounds from applying to university in the first place?
Bridget Phillipson
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her question, and I look forward to speaking with her and her newly constituted Select Committee about this issue and many others.
I recognise the importance of communicating the message that university should be for all young people who have demonstrated that they have the qualifications and talent required. This was not an easy decision, but as Secretary of State, I need to ensure that we secure the long-term financial sustainability of the sector. Alongside that, I am absolutely clear with the sector—with vice-chancellors and others—that it must do more to provide better support and to widen access and participation so that more young people, especially those from more disadvantaged backgrounds, have the opportunity to benefit from higher education.
Ian Sollom (St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire) (LD)
I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of her statement.
It is clear that the current university funding system is broken. Not only is it pushing many universities into a financial crisis, but the changes made by the previous Conservative Government have left us with a system that is deeply unfair in how it treats students. It simply cannot be right to raise fees without taking steps to substantially reform the system to make it fairer.
By abolishing maintenance grants for disadvantaged students in 2016, the Conservatives put up a barrier between disadvantaged students and higher education. The Liberal Democrats opposed that abolition at the time, and we have consistently campaigned to restore those grants ever since. The previous Government also cut the repayment threshold to £25,000, so today’s students have to repay hundreds of pounds more per year than older graduates on the same salary. Perhaps worst of all, they lengthened the repayment period from 30 years to 40 years for those starting courses from August 2023 onwards, so today’s students will still be paying back their loans in 2066.
Does the Secretary of State accept that the first priority must be to fully reform the system, fixing the damage that those changes made and creating a system that is fair for all students? That, rather than simply putting up fees without those much wider reforms, has to be the best way forward. The crisis in funding for universities must be addressed, but have the Government considered how to support universities without raising fees? Does the Secretary of State agree that an important first step would be to recognise the benefits of international students and give universities stability in that area of policy? Does she also agree that any reform must examine how universities currently spend their allocation of £10,000 per student per year, so that that money is spent as efficiently as possible?