Education and Skills Reform

Caroline Nokes Excerpts

Wednesday 9th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Before I call the Secretary of State, I remind Members that statements are an opportunity for the Secretary of State to make a statement and for Members to ask questions, not make statements of their own.

[The Secretary of State for Education (Lucy Powell)]

With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement to update the House on the Government’s education and skills reforms.

It is a real privilege to address Members for the first time as Education Secretary—without question, the best job in Government. I got a reminder of why this is such a special job when I went to GCSE results day in Harper Green school in Bolton. While I was with Micah as he opened his exceptional results, his mum beamed and gave him a massive hug. She then gave me one, too—she was thanking me for his success. That is the power of education: a source of pride and hope, and a sense of achievement and confidence. I was a proud mum myself on GCSE results day this year, and I know how much hard work goes in and how committed our teachers and staff are.

However, results day is not like that for every child. Too many are locked out of opportunity and left behind, which is why we are leading an education revolution. We have real strengths to build on; as yesterday’s programme for international student assessment results showed, a 30-year consensus begun by the last Labour Government and continued by successive Governments, particularly focusing on literacy and numeracy, has raised standards and performance. Generations of children have benefited from world-leading practice in fundamentals such as phonics—introduced by Labour and built on by the Conservatives—and today, more pupils are getting the top grades in GCSE maths and are going on to do A-level. As someone who loves maths and did an A-level in it myself, that brings me huge joy. The whole House should celebrate and thank our fantastic teaching workforce for the latest PISA data, which shows strong international rankings in maths, reading and science.

I will always keep pushing for ever higher standards, but continued improvement is about challenging ourselves about what is going wrong, not just what is going right. An honest appraisal of the evidence shows that our current system works well for some, but is leaving too many behind. The disadvantage gap remains stubbornly wide; the gap between regions is widening; the special educational needs and disabilities crisis is growing; 1.5 million children were persistently absent from school at the last general election; the number of young people educated at home has doubled since 2019; and now a million young people, all educated during the past 16 years, are not in education, employment or training. Anyone who cares about the futures of these young people can see the need for change. Alan Milburn has warned of a lost generation, labelling education “the faltering foundation”. The co-chairs of the white working class inquiry said that

“Doing more of the same is unlikely to solve the problem”,

and even Andreas Schleicher, who oversees PISA, said when commenting on our results that

“A big share of young people think school is a waste of time. That’s not really good news”.

That is the other side of the coin of a one-size-fits-all system.

Nothing symbolises how we have lost perspective more than the treadmill of failure young people are on with the endless cycle of maths and English resits. Of those retaking their maths GCSE this summer, under 14% got the standard pass they needed—that is nearly nine in 10 experiencing failure again and again. Maths and English are essential, but everything we know about how to build confidence in young people tells us that this approach does not work, yet we carry on. Researchers from University College London have called it a “wellbeing penalty”. I call it wrong, which is why I am changing it.

We are in the middle of a huge technological revolution, and the world is changing at a faster rate than anyone can keep up with. My children—all our children—will be doing jobs that my generation could not have conceived of. In this world of change, we have a duty to change too, but in a way that builds on, rather than abandons, what we know to be true about learning. Let us be clear: in the Al and social media age, the human ability to understand and interpret the world around us becomes more important, not less.

Literacy and numeracy become more important, not less. We must equip our young people to master technology, not be mastered by it, and there is value in human endeavour that Al can never replace. While pen-and-paper exams have their place, we need to rebalance towards the applied skills of the modern world and include practical learning in practical subjects such as computing, drama and physical education, as well as ensuring that human skills such as speaking and presenting are developed. We need both knowledge and skills, not one or the other.

We are talking about a broader, more inclusive education, built on strong foundations and with pathways for all. We are talking about education as a passport to work, to life and to success, regardless of people’s needs, ambitions or postcode. We are talking about supporting all children on every step of the way, from their first days of life to their first days of work and beyond. We are talking about early intervention, smoothing transitions, boosting enrichment, creating clear pathways, raising standards, keeping young people engaged, and closing the gap between classroom and workplace. We are talking about excellence for all, not just for some. This will be less an exam factory and more a talent factory.

I can also confirm that we will see through the vital SEND reforms, built in partnership with parents and professionals. We are investing now in a new system of early intervention and the right support close to home so that families can get the help that they need first. We will introduce legislation and set out our response to the consultation in due course.

Our commitment to opportunity does not stop there. We will make this country a technical education superpower, creating new pathways of equal esteem and equal ambition. We will connect our young people to the careers not of some dusty past, but of an exciting future. Over the summer, the Prime Minister and I announced our plans to transform technical education and work experience for young people from the age of 14, building on the revolution that is already happening post-16. Combining this with high-level academic subjects, we will develop top-quality technical qualifications that will lead to clearer pathways into T-Levels, A-Levels and the new V-Levels, as well as apprenticeships, universities and beyond. We will provide a clear line of sight into work, tailored to local opportunities, by working with mayors and local leaders.

Some claim that improving technical education is somehow anti-academic, but such lazy falsehoods are stuck in the past. Technical education can also give new purpose to academic subjects, and countries that boast low levels of NEETs combine the two. Our curriculum and assessment reform will go hand in hand with that ambition, and we will soon publish proposals building on the Becky Francis review. We will have fewer barriers to progression and new emphasis on the skills that enable young people to succeed, including critical literacy, as well as more foundation and stepping-stone qualifications. More space will be available, including room for creative subjects, PE, and the development of deeper understanding. However, this will not be a system of separation. Instead, there will be choices, options, chances, and a curriculum that will be broad enough for long enough to capture the imagination of every child. That means changing the way in which schools are measured to incentivise a broader offer and reward inclusion—a system underpinned, now and always, by progress in English, maths and science. I will set out those proposals in due course.

I know that many worry about change, although they agree that change is needed. Let me reassure education leaders, teachers and the workforce that they will be part of this process on every step of the way. Perhaps even more important than these new reforms is a new way of working. We will design change in partnership with the people who deliver it—change based on the very best evidence and practice, not reform beamed into the classroom directly from Whitehall. Mayoral and strategic authorities, for example, will help to deliver real work experience opportunities. For the first time, mayors will have control of the 16-19 education budget, and I know that, in respect of early years and early intervention, we can transform outcomes through the power of place.

This is just the beginning. Big reform is on the way. We are moving quickly because this cannot wait. The eyes of those young people locked out of opportunity who do not see education working for them are on us, and it is our duty to show them that we get it. Some have called this “bringing back stupid”. Not a bit of it; as the Prime Minister said last week, we are bringing back hope.

I commend this statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

--- Later in debate ---

[Laura Trott]

It is what happened. Instead of raising aspirations, the system lowered expectations.

The danger in what the Government are proposing is obvious. History will repeat itself. Highly academic schools will continue to push their pupils towards academic qualifications while schools serving more disadvantaged communities will come under pressure to steer children towards technical routes far earlier, because that is what happened before. Can the Secretary of State tell the House what evidence she has that her reforms will produce a different result, and can she guarantee that choosing a technical pathway at 14 will not close down a young person’s opportunity to go on to complete academic GCSEs? Can she explain exactly how this approach differs from the failed approach in Scotland and in Wales? From where I am sitting, it sounds very similar.

There are also serious practical questions about how any of this will work. The Government say that the new pathways will begin in 2028, but what qualifications will schools be expected to offer? What standards will those qualifications have to meet, and do schools have the specialist teachers, facilities and employer partnerships required to meet them? What assessment has the Department made of the additional burden that this will place on schools? What funding will be provided? This is not happening in isolation. Schools are already being asked to implement major SEND reforms, and—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. The right hon. Lady has had over five minutes. If I am going to be tough on Back Benchers for asking long questions, I should also be tough on Front Benchers.

[Lucy Powell]

I look forward to having many of these exchanges across the Dispatch Box. I would have hoped, though, that the right hon. Lady might have been a little more generous in building on the sense that there has been consensus on these issues for over 30 years. That began with a Labour Prime Minister talking about “education, education, education”, introducing the literacy hour and numeracy hour, introducing phonics, bringing in Sure Start for early intervention, and developing an evidence-based cycle of continued improvement. It was built on by the right hon. Lady’s Government—there is no question about that. There used to be consensus on technical education as well. Her Government should be proud of introducing T-levels, which are now coming on stream. They also introduced university technical colleges, which offered a completely separate pathway, in separate institutions, for young people at 14. She might want to look at her own record before she starts having a go.

I am absolutely clear that this is not about creating a two-tier system; it is about creating multiple pathways, which, for some, might lead to the same destination. Some will take different pathways to a career in engineering; some might do A-levels and go to university, whereas others might go down a different route and arrive at the same destination. We have to address the underlying problems with our system and its outcomes; we cannot just take credit for all the good without taking responsibility for what has not worked.

A few people whom the right hon. Lady once lauded agree with us on this issue. Sir Hamid Patel has said:

“our education system is not working for every child.”

The Education Endowment Foundation has said that

“inequality of outcomes…has blighted our education system for far too long.”

Lord Agnew—I remember him—the well-known Conservative Education Minister, has said that our reforms are a “laudable ambition” and a “good signal”.

I agree with the right hon. Lady that things will be challenging, and there is a lot that we have to get right, but Harper Green school, where I was on GCSE results day, has brought in a new construction centre, and its courses for those who are 14 to 16 are massively oversubscribed. A couple of the young lads I met said to me, “I don’t really get on with English and maths, but I come to school every day because I get a great sense of achievement from building a brick wall.” It is those kinds of kids I am thinking about.

I end by saying that I agree with a previous Education Secretary, who said:

“For many years our education system has failed properly to value practical education, choosing to give far greater emphasis to purely academic achievements.”

Well, I agree with Michael Gove. I think it is the first time I have said that.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Education Committee.

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

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and welcome her to her place. I also warmly welcome the Government’s focus on boosting technical and vocational education, and giving them parity of esteem with academic routes.

The Children’s Commissioner has today highlighted the unacceptably high number of young people who are registered at college but attend less than 50% of the time. Colleges need the resources to address this problem by monitoring attendance more effectively and intervening to provide targeted support to students who need it, but despite being part of our state education system, colleges are on an uneven financial playing field, because, unlike schools, they are unable to claim back VAT. They have told my Committee again and again that they could do far more if this unfair and unjustifiable tax anomaly was corrected. May I therefore ask the Secretary of State to make representations to the Chancellor, ahead of the Budget, about colleges being allowed to claim back VAT in the same way that schools can?

[Lucy Powell]

I put on record my huge respect for my hon. Friend for chairing the Education Committee; I look forward to working closely with her and her Committee over the coming months. She has done fantastic work in this space. She is absolutely right: further education really is transformative, especially for some of the children who have been left behind by our broader education system. We have a number of reforms coming in that will help, and we have additional funding going in. I am particularly alive to issues with the transition from school to college and attendance at further education colleges. Those issues, and funding, are key focuses of the Alan Milburn review, which I am following closely. I hope to update the House once the report is published.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lucy Powell]

First, I thank the hon. Member for what he said about the approach we are taking on the endless cycle of resits. To be absolutely clear, every child has the right to resit an exam should they want to do so, but putting them on a treadmill of repeated resits that just brands them a failure and knocks their confidence for life is no way to help give a child a sense of achievement. Actually, the former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak welcomed my remarks on that, so it is not everybody who disagrees with me. We are developing national inclusion standards, which we will publish alongside any legislation or further steps we take on SEND. Of course, devolution does not just stop with mayors. We have great local authorities and great local leaders, and they are at the frontline of delivering a lot of our SEND support.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. I am sure the Secretary of State meant to say the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak).

[Lucy Powell]

Oh, is he still a Member?

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

He is still here, yes.

[Dame Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)]

I welcome my right hon. Friend to her exciting new role and I welcome her emphasis on the importance of technical and technological education. I am always struck by the energy, intelligence and ambition of the young people I meet across Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West, but after 14 years of Tory neglect they have been let down. The attainment gap between young people in the north-east and London is at its highest since records began. Will my right hon. Friend meet me to see how we can address that and ensure that young people in the north-east have the opportunities and the education they deserve?