(1 week, 1 day ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
As the hon. Lady says, there will always be children who miss out. How do we bring them into the system? The Minister has, no doubt, listened to her question, and hopefully his answer may be of some help.
In March 2024, the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health revealed that 109,000 children in Northern Ireland were in relative poverty. Given that 97,000 to 98,000 children are receiving free school meals, there could potentially be around 11,400 children eligible for assistance and not claiming, some perhaps for the very reasons that the hon. Member for Eastleigh highlighted. More must be done to recognise that.
Some 89,000 children in Northern Ireland are said to be in absolute poverty, which is awful to think about. What a fine line there is between relative and absolute poverty. However, the fine line means that they either get a meal or do not get a meal, and it is important that they get one. I am being constructive in my questions, and I ask the Minister what we can do to address those issues.
Free school meals are a fantastic way to support parents, and they take a bit of pressure off them. Parents do not want to send their children to school without a meal; they want to make sure their children have a meal and a full stomach. Children’s inquisitive minds work better when they are not worrying about getting fed.
We must remember that our schools promote healthy eating and encourage parents to pack healthy and balanced lunches. While that is a wonderful initiative in principle, the cost of food has risen, as other hon. Members have outlined. The figures are very clear: it is impossible to produce a meal for 69p or 78p, and we need to remember that when it comes to producing helpful and nutritious meals.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. The hon. Gentleman makes an interesting point. However, as a new Member who strongly welcomes the new breakfast club initiative, I point out that in my constituency, like many others, only one in 10 schools currently offers a free breakfast club to children. Many of the schools that do offer one rely on companies such as Greggs, and the generosity of parents and teachers to put on the clubs. While I understand that there may be some kinks in the system as we roll out the early adoption scheme, is it not better that the Government are stepping forward, providing funding and working with teachers and schools, rather than relying on the generosity of private businesses and the teachers themselves?
The hon. Gentleman is right. I am not here to deliver a bad message to the Minister. I welcome the scheme, because it is a good scheme. Any scheme is a good scheme if it helps.
I was about to mention Greggs, Kellogg’s and other companies that do deals with schools. Just in the past week, Asda and Tesco have come up with pilot schemes across the United Kingdom through which food that is about to expire will be given to certain groups. And schoolchildren are a group that it could be given to.
There is nothing wrong with the food. I am of a certain generation, and in my house, when I was growing up, nothing was ever thrown out—nothing. I mean that. If the potatoes were old, they were roasted. If the cheese had a bit of blue growth around the edge, it was cut off or wiped off and we ate it. It has not done me any harm. I am shortly coming to a significant age, and perhaps those foods helped me live longer.
My point is that we need to take advantage of opportunities, and the pilot schemes set up by Asda and Tesco are opportunities. The hon. Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore) is absolutely right that there are other ways of doing things, but we welcome the Government’s positive initiative—if something is good, it is good; it is never bad just because it was proposed by another party. Let us include it in our agenda.
It is no secret that fresh, healthy food is more expensive than the easier alternative, so providing something at school will benefit so many families—parents want that as well. There have previously been calls to provide free school meals for all children. Many MPs, celebrities and organisations backed the No Child Left Behind campaign to provide universal free school meals. Such initiatives and partnerships could be developed to help us deliver for our children.
There is proof that nourishing and healthy meals support children in performing academically. They have better concentration, better memory and better energy, which boosts their educational performance and increases the likelihood of a successful future. That is what we all want, and it is what the Government and the Minister are aiming for.
The initiative is similar to the free milk scheme, which I am old enough to remember from when I was a boy back in the 1960s. It was launched after world war two and was still going when I was at school, and indeed after that. It was designed to combat malnutrition and ensure that all schoolchildren under the age of 18 had free access to a good source of protein and calcium to aid their diets and growth.
I have spoken on this topic many times in this Chamber, but I want to emphasise its importance. Some pupils with special educational needs thrive on routine and perhaps live by a very strict diet. We have heard about children with special diets, and we should think about how they are catered for. If there were a SEND debate in this Chamber, it would be full because everybody would come along with their stories, and I would add my stories and examples too. Schools need to provide meals that cater to those children’s needs. No child should suffer or be left behind. Will the Minister offer some clarity on the current guidelines on this issue?
The free school meals system is fantastic. The Government’s initiative is fantastic, and nobody here will ever be churlish about it. I have made some constructive suggestions for how we can move forward in partnership with businesses such as Greggs, Kellogg’s, Tesco, Asda and others. As I said, there is more to do to recognise all the children and parents who could benefit from this scheme. Furthermore, perhaps the Minister and his Department could consider universal free school meals for the betterment of all children’s futures.
Again, constructively and positively, I look to the Minister to ensure that he has those conversations with the devolved nations—he makes it his business to do that, which is constructive and very welcome—and to ensure that adequate funding is always there to support suffering children and parents who are on the breadline, which makes it difficult for them to cater for and look after their children.
(1 week, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberI beg to move,
That this House has considered mental health support in educational settings.
I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting this debate, and the MPs from across the House who supported its application. I also thank Emily Horsfall, my team and the staff at the Mental Health Foundation for their support in preparing for today’s debate.
There should be no doubt that good mental health and wellbeing are as critical to the progression of our young people as physical health is. Protecting mental health at an early age can have a defining impact on lifelong resilience and ensure positive mental health outcomes. At a time when young people up and down the country—especially girls and young women—face a barrage of challenges from what feels like a never-ending conveyor belt of demeaning and misogynistic content on social media, the consequences of the covid-19 pandemic and the cost of living crisis, this is a timely debate, and I thank hon. Members who have stayed in the Chamber to contribute to it.
Much of what I will say today reflects my conversations with young people, parents, teachers and professionals in my constituency of Redditch and the villages. When they approach me on a visit, when I am food shopping in Tesco or at one of my surgeries, they display courage and determination to build a system that is fit for purpose and which will ensure that all children get the support they need to have the most fulfilling lives possible. I hope this debate can be about how we can support our schools and education professionals, who are not trained mental health professionals but are so often on the frontline, to ensure that our children get the best support they can at the most appropriate time.
I commend the hon. Gentleman for bringing forward this issue. I was just looking at some of the stats for Northern Ireland in order to support his argument. In 2023, pupils with disabilities reported lower levels of general wellbeing across all measures than those who are not disabled. Does he agree that access to pastoral care teams, who are equipped and trained to help those with declining mental health due to disabilities, would be one way of addressing this very issue?
I think that is the first time the hon. Gentleman has intervened on me, so I feel very honoured. I absolutely agree with him, and I will talk about other affected groups later in my remarks. I thank him for his intervention.
I hope this debate can be about how we support our schools and education professionals, but I also hope that the discussion raises awareness about the challenges facing young people. I know that some people like to hand-wave away any discussion about mental health problems among children and young people. Since the announcement of this debate, I have read previous debates elsewhere, and a few people have whispered in my ear that they do not believe that children are resilient enough these days. Well, I simply do not buy that argument. I know it makes some uncomfortable when young people talk about their mental health challenges, but it can only be positive that awareness and the mainstreaming of mental health conditions have given so many across society the confidence to have honest conversations about how they are feeling and the impact that others’ actions can have on their mental health.
What do the statistics tell us about the state of our young people’s mental health? NHS statistics show us that about one in five children and young people aged eight to 25 had a probable mental disorder in 2023, and that the number of urgent referrals of children and young people to emergency mental health services has tripled since 2019. The uncomfortable truth is that waiting lists for children and adolescent mental health services can be a postcode lottery. For instance, in November last year, the average waiting time for a child to receive a referral for a first appointment in Hereford and Worcestershire was seven weeks, compared with the national average of five weeks. From freedom of information requests, we know that one child waited almost two years for an appointment. Referrals at the Hereford and Worcestershire health and care NHS trust have increased by 118% in the last five years—a trend that is reflected across the country.
I thank my hon. Friend for securing this Backbench Business debate. That statistic of one in five young people having a mental health condition must concern us all. I hear from my own constituents in Shipley that they are waiting a long time to get their children seen on the NHS—whether for an attention deficit hyperactivity disorder assessment or to get medication—and during that time the children are unable to participate in school. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is vital that children and young people get access to mental health support and that we get waiting times down so that they can participate properly in school?
I absolutely agree. This is about parity between mental and physical health. We would move heaven and earth if those children had physical injuries, and we must do more to assess and treat the mental health conditions from which young people are suffering.
My hon. Friend makes a valid point about the need for parity between mental health and physical health. Does he agree that there is actually a connection between the two? Quite often, poor physical health can impact the mental health of a young person, and vice versa.
I agree entirely. Many of the young people I have spoken to have suffered from long-term physical conditions or illnesses that have had a detrimental impact on their mental health.
There is evidence that the severity of mental distress has increased. Admissions to acute medical wards for children and young people with mental health concerns increased by 65% between 2012 and 2022. The mental health report by the Association of Colleges, published in September, found that 90% of respondents reported an increase in disclosure of mental health issues in 16 to 18-year-olds and 86% did so for those over 19. Most colleges are increasing their mental health resources, but the need for joined-up and well-resourced services is urgent. The report found that almost a third of colleges reported at least one death by suicide in the previous year. It is distressing to consider that such an escalation can and does happen, and that is why this debate is so important.
Despite the expansion of children and young people’s mental health services, increased demand means that the NHS estimates that less than half of those with such needs are being supported. The Children and Young People’s Mental Health Coalition found that certain groups have an increased likelihood of being impacted by mental health challenges, such as children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities, those from racialised and LGBTQ+ backgrounds, neuro- divergent young people, those with physical or long-term conditions, young carers, children in care, and refugee and migrant children.
Children in kinship care arrangements also have a high prevalence of social, emotional and mental health needs similar to those of looked-after children, but owing to their lesser entitlements and a lack of access to suitable support, their experience and needs should be considered when designing vital mental health support in education settings. The complexity of the issues that may impact on a child’s mental health is the reason why mental health charities have been campaigning for a cross-Government mental health approach for such a long time, and I hope this Government will deliver on that.
Why are education establishments so crucial to this debate? The Centre for Mental Health has published research showing that 75% of lifetime mental health difficulties occur before the age of 24 and that 50% occur before the age of 14. That is why education settings are critical in addressing this national crisis. Of course, schools and colleges are seen as places where children learn academic skills, but they are also safe places for some to seek support.
Currently, mental health provision in education settings in England is varied. Mental health support teams can be found in almost 50% of schools, and they have proved highly effective. Research published by Barnardo’s has demonstrated that for each £1 invested, the Government have saved £1.90. The education and health officials I have spoken to said that we must reach England-wide coverage of MHSTs as soon as possible. If this was done in combination with the Government’s promise to deliver a school counsellor in every school, that would be a powerful indicator of their commitment to tackling the crisis.
I thank the hon. Member for giving way on this hugely important subject. As I am sure is the case for other Members across the House, I find that children’s mental health is one of the subjects that comes up most frequently on the doorstep, with parents really struggling to get the mental health care that their children need. One of the questions that is asked most frequently is: how can we afford to increase mental health care? Does he agree with me that it is actually more cost-effective to provide timely mental health support than to end up treating people when they have been sicker for longer?
I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. I would argue that we cannot afford not to engage in early prevention and early intervention. It does save the Government money further down the line.
My hon. Friend will know that suicide is the main cause of death for young people under the age of 35 in the UK. For those under 18, school is where they spend the majority of their life, and somewhere we have an opportunity to make change. Will my hon. Friend join me in paying tribute to the 3 Dads Walking, who have played a significant role in ensuring that this issue stays on the agenda and in tackling the assumption that talking about suicide makes it more likely to happen?
I thank my hon. Friend for that important contribution to this debate and I pay tribute to the group she mentioned. It is such a critical issue to the future of our young people. I congratulate anyone who comes into this space and makes a positive difference to the outcomes.
Despite the best efforts of many teachers, education settings are yet to have much of that dedicated support. The experience of some young people and their families shows that the support on offer in some schools is not sufficient. The Mental Health Foundation works with whole families to support them in developing their mental health together. Ahead of this debate, it asked two of the participants in one of its programmes in London, Bemi and her daughter Ayo, to share their own experiences. Bemi said that the Government
“say are going to invest in children’s mental health, but this isn’t happening. There is a lot of pressure on children”
these days. She said that
“it is having a toll on children’s mental health, and as a parent, I am also feeling this strain of seeing the constant breakdowns”
and the failure to access support. Her 13-year-old daughter Ayo suggested that schools needed to be much more proactive in asking about children’s mental health:
“Nobody is asking how we feel and never attempting to get to the root cause of things; they only pick up on when you are behaving irrationally but never try to figure out why you feel this way.”
School staff are often the first point of contact when a pupil struggles with their mental health, so they need to feel confident to support their pupils and be able to spot the signs of difficulties. Education Support, a charity supporting the mental health and wellbeing of teaching and education staff, found that 74% of staff often help pupils with personal matters beyond their academic work. Educators are filling in where there are gaps, further highlighting the need for joined-up and embedded services.
I totally agree with my hon. Friend that schools and teachers are at the forefront of the mental health crisis facing our children. I recently visited a local primary school, Burley and Woodhead Church of England primary, and I pay tribute to the staff there for the excellent work they do to support the young people with their mental health and to make it much easier for them to talk about it. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is vital that schools have adequate resources to provide such support?
I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention; I absolutely agree. It is not just young people who are struggling. The additional workload of carrying out wellbeing checks, sometimes in distressing situations, is taking its toll on staff: 78% of all staff are stressed in education settings, rising to 84% among senior leaders. No one can do their best at work if they are mentally depleted, and healthy teachers can better provide high-quality support for their pupils.
What else can we do? We cannot ignore the other factors that have a significant impact on a young person’s wellbeing, which is why we need a whole-of-Government approach. Children and young people might be experiencing poor-quality housing and overcrowding, family members in low-paid and insecure work, or the inability to get a GP or NHS dentist appointment when they need it—all challenges that I am glad this Government are taking action to remedy.
But we can go further. “A Mentally Healthier Nation”, a report unanimously endorsed by mental health charities, calls for the roll-out of anti-bullying programmes across the country. Crucially, the evidence shows that these programmes work best when delivered in a “whole school” way. That is, rather than taking a narrow approach based on discipline, the student and staff body understands what constitutes bullying and its impacts, stands against it and has tactics to prevent it. These programmes have been tested and shown to be effective. They create healthier school environments, prevent mental health problems in the future and lead to economic gains. The costs of picking up the pieces of childhood bullying in later life are enormous, as are the losses to the labour market it can cause, as well as the toll of bullying in the here and now.
Young people can text Shout, a crisis line, for help when they are being bullied. Those who run the service report texters struggling with suicidal thoughts, urges to self-harm, insomnia and feelings of depression and anxiety. Some referred to the anger, shame, fear, confusion, vulnerability, hopelessness and frustration that resulted from being bullied. Others spoke about their lack of focus and poor performance at school as a result of their bullying.
We also need to look at innovative ways that have been developed to address the threats our young people are experiencing. In a world where so-called influencers like Andrew Tate can get their claws into our young men’s minds, we need to look to at work such as the Mental Health Foundation’s “Becoming a Man” programme. Currently operating in Lambeth and Islington, it works with young men aged 12 to 16 who face disadvantage and inequality that put them at greater risk of developing mental health problems. It creates a safe space for young men to come together and discuss issues about their lives, taking into account their lived experiences and the often difficult environments they navigate. It helps them to develop strengths such as integrity, self-determination, positive anger expression and respect for women. Early evaluations of this work are promising, and Government support is needed to grow the evidence base.
Schools have a vital role in understanding young people’s online experiences and how they might impact their mental health. The Girlguiding girls’ attitudes survey found that one in eight young people aged 13 to 18 had seen sexual threats directed at women and girls online, including those of rape. One in eight girls said that they had received sexual threats online from strangers or someone they knew.
Over a year after the passing of the Online Safety Act 2023, suicide, eating disorder, race hate and incel forums remain easily accessible, and it is not clear if and when action might be taken against them. Given Ofcom’s permissive approach, it is likely that school staff will need to understand what sorts of communities pupils are involved in and the impact they are having on them. At a time when 36% of boys say they have had Andrew Tate content shown to them by a friend in school, the onslaught against young girls’ self-confidence, value and worth goes further than being content on a screen; it is putting them at risk.
How do we pull all this together? Preventive mental health initiatives, perhaps overwhelmed by the complexity of the challenge, are scattered and rarely appropriately funded, and they often do not learn from each other. Sometimes, we even use localism as an excuse to neither fund systems nor hold them accountable. We must create a public mental health infrastructure. The Mental Health Foundation describes it as having a clear road map, led by evidence, in which every part of the system knows its own responsibility for reducing mental health problems, and is funded and held accountable for its delivery. That means re-examining the public health grant, which despite a welcome uplift this year is still well below 2015 levels. It means ringfenced funding for schools and the NHS tied to specific outcomes. It also means the roll-out of England-wide mental health support teams and counsellors in each school.
The Children and Young People’s Mental Health Coalition responded to the NHS 10-year plan consultation, calling for the plan to financially support integrated care systems to deliver a comprehensive road map for mental health for 0 to 25-year-olds. The Association of Colleges found that more than 30% of colleges are not involved in their local suicide prevention plan, and 65% stated that they do not have a joint provision with their local NHS trust. It is clear that to keep children well and safe, our NHS services and their commissioning bodies must be fully integrated into mental health support in educational settings. Schools, colleges and universities should be included in local mental health strategies, and data should be shared freely.
I am excited by the Government’s pledge to roll out Young Futures hubs, which aim to bring local services together, deliver support for teenagers at risk of being drawn into crime or facing mental health challenges, and, where appropriate, deliver universal youth provision. These initiatives could represent the start of such an infrastructure and an implementation plan for a national network of these hubs. The Royal College of Psychiatrists states that the hubs have the potential to support some of the most minoritised children who might not be able to access CAMHS or school-based services consistently. I am pleased to see that the NHS remains committed to expanding access to children and young people’s mental health services, and that the operational planning guidance recognises that early intervention improves outcomes for children throughout their lives, reduces long-term pressures on health services, and benefits the economy and wider society.
I urge the Government to seize this moment and see if they can create a true network of mental health support across the country by getting anti-bullying programmes in place, following the evidence and committing to relentlessly drive down levels of poor mental health, and thereby build mentally healthy communities in our schools and beyond. Prevention, early help and treatment can help young people to deliver positive outcomes. Yes, many of the measures I have referred to today and those already announced by the Government will require significant investment, but the cost of inaction and the knock-on impacts on education and children’s social care would far outweigh any initial outlay. Now is the time for action.
First, let me thank the Minister for his comprehensive response, but also for how his Department has helpfully answered the many questions that my office has put through to him. I also thank him for his candidness at the Dispatch Box, and I look forward to hearing a lot of the detail following the questions from Members from all parts of the House.
I will make reference in a quick speed-dating way to many of the comments that Members have made. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) for her expertise and comments, particularly on SEND provision. I thank the hon. Member for Brighton Pavilion (Siân Berry) for raising awareness of the success that she and campaigners have had in her constituency. As a fellow former county councillor, I, like the hon. Member for Horsham (John Milne), understand the challenges that county councils face, particularly in rural areas, and I understand his frustration. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Ashford (Sojan Joseph) for his focus on early intervention, and I support his viewpoint that cross-Government working is vital to making progress on this issue.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Leigh Ingham) for her intervention. I am sad to hear about students being told to unroll from school because provision is not available. That is simply not acceptable. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Weston-super-Mare (Dan Aldridge) for his excellent and heartfelt comments about representing his residents, and also for his timely comments about the work of teachers in our schools.
I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson). She has a long history on this subject, and I have read many of her contributions over the past two weeks. I know that she is fully committed to this cause. I thank the Conservative spokesperson, the hon. Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Dr Johnson) for her thoughtful comments and for her expertise in the area in which she worked prior to coming to this place.
Finally, we have been talking in this debate about the life chances of our children. We have made so much progress in bringing discussions about mental health to the fore, and we know the difference that early intervention can make. It is okay not to be okay, and we have made progress with people feeling that they can say that, but it will not be okay if we do not make progress to support children in the long run by the time this Parliament is over.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered mental health support in educational settings.
(1 week, 6 days ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is an honour and a pleasure to serve with you as Chair, Ms Furniss. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) for securing this debate on such an important subject. I thank him for his continued contribution to improving the lives of young carers and for sharing his professional experience and expertise. Much as we lament that he is no longer a maths teacher, we celebrate the fact that he is here in this place putting his insight and experience to such valuable use.
I thank each and every child and young person across the country who selflessly cares for members of their family. Our Government will do everything we can to ensure that you and your families have the support you need at home and in your education. We are determined, through our opportunity mission, to break the link between a child’s background and their future success. We want every child, including young carers, to be set up for the best start in life so that they succeed and thrive at school. We will tackle the disadvantage that we know persists in far too many places through excellent teaching, high standards and the generational challenge of improving school standards. We will build on the opportunities for growth that every young person should have, so that they can follow the pathway that is right for them, whether through a high-quality apprenticeship or by going to college or university. Hon. Members have rightly drawn out those points in the debate.
Underpinning all that, the Government are determined to build family security and ensure that every child, whether a carer or not, has a safe and loving home. To do that, we must tackle the scar of child poverty, which impacts far too many children and young people and their families.
The impact of caring on children and young people’s education, which has been rightly highlighted today, has been hidden for far too long. Too many young carers continue to be invisible to their schools and wider agencies. They fall behind their peers and fail to reach their full potential and unlock opportunities, despite improvements in the assessment of their need for support. It is unacceptable that any child or young person who selflessly dedicates themselves to supporting ill or disabled family members goes through childhood without support themselves. We must ensure that no child faces these disadvantages alone.
Adding those young children to the schools census has, for the first time, shone a light on their education. It has raised awareness in schools and given us much of the evidence that we have used for this debate, but we know that not enough schools are identifying and accurately recording the information on young carers in the census, as my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow pointed out, with 72% not recording any young carers in 2024.
We expect that data to improve over time, as the data collection becomes better established, but we are looking at the ways in which the data is entered and whether we can bring in technical changes to support more accurate reporting. We obviously have to do that without overly burdening schools, and we are determined to get that right. We also want to undertake further analysis of the data, and develop and publish young carers’ data on attainment measures alongside the data that we already publish on population, absence, exclusions and suspensions. We will continue to work with organisations such as the Carers Trust, which I know works directly with schools, to raise awareness of these new data requirements and maximise the impact.
I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow that schools should consider how they are recognising and meeting the needs of young carers. As set out in the “Keeping children safe in education” guidance, we require designated safeguarding leads to undergo training to provide them with the knowledge and skills to carry out their roles, and that includes being alert to, and having good knowledge, understanding and awareness of the needs of young carers.
On training for teachers specifically, the mandatory initial teacher training core content framework sets out the minimum entitlement of knowledge, skills and experience that all trainee teachers need in order to be in the best position to teach and support the pupils in their schools. Courses have to be designed so that trainee teachers can respond in the best way possible to the strengths and the needs of all their pupils.
From September 2025, all trainee and early-career teachers will receive a training programme that is underpinned by the initial teacher training and early career framework. That will set out the core body of knowledge, skills and behaviours that defines great teaching. That includes teachers learning that pupils’ experiences at school, and their readiness to learn, can be impacted by their home and life circumstances, and it will include an awareness of young carers.
We recognise that continuous improvement is important in this area, which is why we have committed to review the early-career teacher entitlement in 2027, including the content of the initial teacher training and the early career framework, to make sure that it is providing that best possible support for new teachers. As part of that, we will obviously consider the issues raised in today’s debate.
Responsibility for young carers cuts across education and health into both children and adult social care. The Children Act 1989 and the Care Act 2014 place clear duties on both of those social care services to assess and support the needs of young carers. Being a young carer was identified as a factor in almost 18,000 children’s social care assessments in the year ending March 2024. The needs of those young carers and their families must therefore be fully recognised within the “Children’s social care national framework” statutory guidance on the purpose and principles of practice for social workers.
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) on securing this debate. The Minister is developing a really important point. When researching this topic, one of the things that terrified me was that 38% of carers report having had a mental health challenge while in an education setting. I therefore really welcome the Government’s promise to deliver a mental health professional or counsellor in every school. I just wonder whether the Minister could indicate when she thinks that might happen.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right that people with mental health issues, including young carers and indeed the family members who they are caring for, are just not getting the help, support or care that they need.
We are absolutely determined to fix the broken system. We are already recruiting 8,500 more mental health workers, introducing access to specialist mental health professionals in every school, rolling out Young Futures hubs in every community, and looking to modernise the Mental Health Act 1983. We recognise that we must address the significant challenge that my hon. Friend raises, and if we are going to tackle that issue and achieve the differences that we want to see for the young carers we are talking about today, that is a good place to start.
An important part of that jigsaw is our manifesto commitment to introduce a single unique identifier to improve information sharing and link multiple sets of data between Government Departments and organisations more quickly and accurately, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Leigh Ingham), who is no longer in her place, rightly referenced in her intervention. That is why the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill introduces provision for that identifier in law. The Bill will pave the way for the consistent identifier to be specified and for organisations to be required to use it, and to create a clear legal basis for sharing that information where we know that it will promote the welfare, wellbeing and safeguarding of children, including young carers.
We fully support the “No Wrong Doors for Young Carers” memorandum of understanding developed by the Carers Trust on behalf of the Local Government Association. It is vital that we improve joint working between adult and children’s social care services, health and other key organisations. We strongly encourage local authorities to sign up to that.
For the first time, the school census data is evidencing the impact on attendance, exclusions and suspensions. We know that young carers are far more likely to be absent from school and to have higher rates of exclusion and suspension than their peers. We recognise that absence from school is almost always a symptom of wider needs within a family. It is often the best early indicator of an unmet need that is manifesting in school—or, indeed, by that child not being in school—in a family that may not be in contact with other services.
Our guidance on school attendance highlights that schools should see absence as a symptom and prioritise attendance with strategies such as attainment, behaviour and support for disadvantaged pupils, including the use of the pupil premium and support for young carers. Schools should also consider whether additional support from other external partners—including the local authority; children and young people’s mental health services, which were rightly referenced; and GPs and other health services—would be appropriate and make referrals where necessary. That is of particular importance for young carers. Schools might be the first place to identify where there is a lack of needed support for a family.
As other hon. Members have, I pay tribute to the contribution of my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis), who spoke very powerfully about his family’s circumstances. We have no idea what may be going on in somebody’s home or life. Where that manifests in school, it is important to have the mechanisms in place to provide extra support where it might be needed. My hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) spoke powerfully about that too. There is an awful lot of agreement in the Chamber today about what we want to see.
Daily attendance data collection has been established to ensure consistent recording and monitoring of pupil attendance. We need to support the identification of patterns of absence so that we can help schools and local authorities to make the appropriate interventions. We are absolutely determined to have more children in school; children cannot get an excellent education if they are not in school. Where that is because of responsibilities at home or because a child is a young carer, it is absolutely right that we use the available data to target that support effectively to ensure that every child can be in school and to unlock opportunities for them and their families.
We have allocated £2.9 billion in pupil premium funding this year to improve the attainment of disadvantaged children. As has been discussed, young carer status does not attract pupil premium funding, but evidence suggests that around 60% of young carers are eligible through free school meals entitlement. The guidance to school leaders is absolutely clear, however, that pupil premium funding should not be restricted to just those who have eligibility for the funding; schools must use it to support all pupils where they identify needs. That will include young carers.
Access to higher education should be based on ability and attainment, not background. Opportunity has to be available to all. We must ensure that no group is left behind; everyone should be able to fulfil their aspirations. In the summer, we will set out our plans for changes to higher education, which will include the part that we expect higher education providers to play in improving access and outcomes for all disadvantaged students. In the meantime, I welcome the development at the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service, better known as UCAS, to include young people with caring responsibilities. That inclusion, along with the school census, highlights the need for much better support for young carers. We especially want to ensure that they can make the best of their opportunities and possibilities beyond key stage 4.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow again for raising this important matter, and all hon. Members who have taken part in the debate. I also thank my hon. Friend for his many years of campaigning and work on the issue. Young carers contribute enormously to the wellbeing of their families and communities, and to society at large. That is why we are all here: they deserve to be championed and to be assured that society will reciprocate and support them in return. I acknowledge that the education system, in partnership with agencies, needs to improve to meet the developing needs of children, especially our young carers. They must be at the heart of our opportunity mission.
Finally, I thank all those committed professionals and volunteers who support young carers—may they continue to do so. As a Government, we will continue to work with them to improve outcomes. To the many teaching and pastoral care staff in schools, to the early help, youth and social work professionals, to those working in local councils and in carers organisations throughout the country: I feel confident that, with your continued dedication and a Government who are committed to improving the lives of young carers, we will make strides to support this important group.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
All of government and all councils need to do more. They need to understand that we need to do more for children in care to create a level playing field, because they have such difficult issues to overcome. I completely agree with my hon. Friend.
In the same period that the cost of children in care went up to £7 billion, local councils’ overall core funding went down by 9% in real terms. The Government are absolutely right to introduce a financial oversight scheme, because some providers have made excessive profits. It was widely reported that the 20 largest national providers of children’s placements collectively made profits of £310 million in 2021-22.
Of course, we must focus on outcomes for children in care, which are historically and currently very poor. In 2018-19, just 6.8% of children in care received a grade 5 or above in English and maths, compared with 43.2% of all children. In turn, that explains why just 22% of care leavers aged 27 are in employment. Even when they are in employment, there is a £6,000 pay gap between care leavers and those in the general population. It would be easy to blame educators or the care sector for the problem, but the reality is that these children have suffered some sort of significant trauma in their lives. Whether that is neglect, abuse or something else, it is never good.
I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this important subject to Westminster Hall. He mentioned the impact that being in care has on many children. He is probably aware that nearly one third of children in kinship care—just over 31%—have diagnosed or suspected social, emotional or mental health needs. Although we recognise and congratulate the Government on their announcement for kinship carers in the recent Budget, we must also ensure that we make the tools available to children and families to get the mental health support that they need.
(4 months, 3 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I beg to move,
That this House has considered SEND provision in Hampshire.
It is a pleasure to lead my first Westminster Hall debate under your chairship, Sir Mark, particularly on this important topic. I begin by recognising the parents, advocates and campaigners who have brought the issue into the public eye, especially the Kids nursery parent committee from Basingstoke, who are here today in the Public Gallery. Their dedication to advocating for inclusion and calling for urgent reforms to the special educational needs and disabilities system is inspiring, and their personal stories highlight the real impact of this crisis on children, young people and their families.
When I first stood as Labour’s candidate for Basingstoke, I knew that SEND support faced challenges, but it was not until I met families across Basingstoke that I truly understood the depth of the crisis. I spoke to two mothers on the campaign, who live just two doors apart, yet both said they felt alone in their struggles with an adversarial and confusing system. They had no idea that their situations were nearly identical. Both were battling to secure essential support for their children, believing that they were alone in that fight. A mother in my constituency, Michelle, perfectly summarised the struggle. She told me:
“Raising children with SEND is incredibly challenging, exhausting and stressful. There isn’t enough support for parents to cope. We face constant appointments, endless form-filling, and have to fight for the education our kids deserve. It shouldn’t be this hard, and it doesn’t need to be this hard.”
No family should be placed in Michelle’s position, having to fight tooth and nail for a fair, inclusive education for their children.
Just last week, the National Audit Office issued a report described by the Minister for School Standards as a “damning indictment” of the SEND system. The report highlighted that the system is not only financially unsustainable, but is failing to deliver the necessary outcomes for children. It is a broken system—a crisis we inherited, after 14 years of inaction. It is heartening to know, looking around this room, that the sentiment is shared across party lines. The last Conservative Education Secretary labelled the system she left behind as “lose, lose, lose” while current Tory shadow Ministers say that they did not do enough on SEND and should hang their heads in shame. We agree.
The NAO report underscores the reality that families and councils live with every day. The demand for SEND support has surged. Education, health and care plans have increased by 140% since 2014, with more than 576,000 individuals now needing that support. Local authorities are also struggling under a £4.6 billion deficit as high-needs funding, even at £10.7 billion, fails to meet demand. Tribunal appeals have risen by 334%, which is testament to a system where families must fight for basic rights rather than being supported to achieve them.
One parent shared her story with me recently. After waiting two and a half years following an initial needs assessment, her daughter finally secured a placement in a specialist school, but it is a 70-minute round trip for only two hours of schooling each day. That family’s experience reflects a system that feels combative rather than supportive—where councils, as this mum pointed out, spend public funds on solicitors and barristers to deny or delay access to services that children are legally entitled to.
The impact of the crisis on families is stark. Nationally, only 50% of EHC plans met the statutory 20-week timeline in 2023—down from 60% in previous years. That failure to meet deadlines has left parents understandably losing faith in the system. It is little wonder that parents who have children with SEND are significantly more likely to consider home schooling than parents who have children without SEND—a sad consequence of a system that is failing them.
I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate, and thank you, Sir Mark, for your chairmanship. I also thank the parents that my hon. Friend has brought along in support. I have the same situation in my constituency of Redditch in Worcestershire, and if it was not for the parents dotted around the country who fight for their children or grandchildren, we would not have such energy in the new Parliament to fight for the proper solutions for SEND. My hon. Friend talked about trust and the broken system; does he agree that it is essential, if we are to rebuild a system that is fit for purpose, to rebuild trust between local authorities and parents and grandparents, so that co-production can truly start again?
I completely agree with my hon. Friend: crucial to fixing the system will be rebuilding trust between parents, national Government and local authorities. There is much work to do, but I think yesterday’s Budget showed that this Government are making a downpayment on that commitment—and there will be more to come. As my hon. Friend mentioned, the lack of adequate support has lasting impacts on families. Many parents have had to reduce their work hours or even leave employment entirely to care for their children when the local authority fails to provide adequate support. I know, from hearing families’ stories, that many are reaching breaking point, and parents are exhausted from the constant battle against the system.
Hampshire county council, like many others, has been coping with a system in freefall. The number of EHC plans in Hampshire has nearly doubled, from just over 8,000 in 2019 to around 16,000 this year. Hampshire’s cumulative deficit for the dedicated schools grant is now at £86.1 million, representing 9.4% of its total dedicated schools grant income. To put that in perspective, for every £100 that Hampshire receives for schools and SEND provision, it has accumulated nearly £9.40 in debt. That deficit is expected to reach £250 million by 2025-26 if nothing changes. Hampshire also currently spends £47.2 million annually on independent school placements, due to the lack of available spaces in state-funded options, underscoring the urgent need for expanded state provision and the need to support mainstream settings in providing essential SEND support.
I am particularly concerned about the exploration of the statutory override in 2026, which currently allows the education deficits to be kept off councils’ balance sheets. When the override ends, councils like Hampshire could face financial insolvency, forcing them to declare a section 114 notice and request Government intervention. The situation is clearly untenable, and serious reforms are urgently needed, but this crisis is not just about budgets or statistics; it is about real lives and families.
Eleanor, a mother in my constituency, told me about her son. When he turned two, she sent him to the local nursery to be with his older sister, but there it quickly became clear that his development was delayed. On multiple occasions, Eleanor would go to pick him up and find him playing alone in the toilets unsupervised. Quite understandably, that is not what she wanted for her son, but without sufficient support from early years education, and because he could not talk, he was left to blend into the background and slip through the cracks. Eleanor describes the process of fighting for SEND provision as “just terrible”—a constant battle with the local authority in a system that she describes as completely broken.
Another parent, Kelly, shared her story with me. After multiple appointments where she raised concerns about her son’s development, she was told that he was simply the “lazy twin”. But Kelly did not give up. She described how, without clear guidance and support, parents go into the SEND system “blindfolded”, feeling their way through a complex maze that should be straightforward. Jodie, another mother from Basingstoke, told me that
“the only support you get consistently through the whole SEND journey is from other parents who are going through the same thing.”
It is a sad reflection of the system when parents find that their only reliable support is each other.
My hon. Friend the Member for Aldershot (Alex Baker), who wanted to be here today, has heard similar experiences of a lack of suitable school places leaving parents with no option but home schooling for their children. That puts unacceptable pressure on parents, resulting in mental health issues and self-harm, while children miss out on vital opportunities to develop wider life and social skills
A parent in my constituency described the impact of finally receiving specialist provision for her daughter as having a “halo effect”. It brought a sense of normalcy and confidence back to her daughter’s life, sparking interests outside the classroom, but that positive impact should not just be the rare exception; it should be the standard experience for every family navigating the SEND system.
When I committed to a manifesto focused on building a truly inclusive, responsive and supportive education system, it was not just a pledge; it was a mission. Every child deserves an education system that meets their needs, especially those children with special educational needs and disabilities.
I am encouraged by the Government’s actions in taking the first steps towards real change. Yesterday’s Budget marked a significant commitment from the Chancellor, with a £1 billion increase in SEND and alternative provision funding. That is a 6% real-terms boost. The funding is a critical step towards improving outcomes for children and families, and guiding our SEND system towards much-needed financial stability, fixing the foundations to ensure that every child in England can achieve and thrive regardless of their background.
The children’s wellbeing Bill, which was announced in the King’s Speech, will mandate schools to collaborate with local authorities to improve SEND inclusion. That is a foundational step. Our commitment to expand early years support by investing in SEND-specific teacher training and establishing a framework for early intervention, such as the Nuffield early language intervention, is all part of a larger strategy to prevent children as soon as possible from slipping through the cracks. The Government have also said that they will ensure accountability in mainstream settings through bodies like Ofsted to guarantee that every school is equipped to meet the needs of students with SEND. More widely, the Government have committed to recruiting 6,500 new teachers to reduce class sizes, which I hope will also allow for more inclusive classrooms.
This crisis has stretched on for far too long and we must work on a cross-party basis to address it before the situation becomes truly unsalvageable. Every child, regardless of whether they have SEND or not, should have the support in place so that they can thrive in school and beyond.
Today, with the Kids parent committee from Basingstoke and the Minister both present in Westminster Hall, I want to amplify a clear message from families in my constituency: we need greater training and support for mainstream early years staff in SEND, because early intervention is crucial. By equipping early years staff with the skills to recognise and support children with additional needs, we can ensure that children receive timely help, giving both parents and children a solid foundation. I fully support that goal and will work alongside others to make it a reality.
In yesterday’s Budget, the Chancellor announced an additional £1.8 billion to expand Government-funded childcare and allocated £69 million to grow the network of family hubs. This funding represents a chance to provide essential support and early intervention for SEND families across the country.
I hope that this debate shines a light on the reality of SEND provision for families, not only in Hampshire but across the country. Today I urge the Minister and colleagues from all parties urgently to support a reformed SEND system that lifts up our young people and their families.
The Government have rightly committed to breaking down barriers to opportunity for all, which must include children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities. We know that there is no magic wand that can fix this broken system overnight, but I urge the Minister to collaborate with her colleagues across Government to urgently reform the SEND system, so that we can restore faith in SEND provision, and I am hopeful that this Government will lead the way in creating a system that truly works for every young person, every family and every community. As Michelle put it:
“It shouldn’t be this hard, and it doesn’t need to be this hard.”
(6 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberYes. We know that the current system is not working for anyone, which is why the changes we have outlined are so important. We know that we need to spread best practice and drive standards across all of our schools, including for children with special educational needs, who are a key priority for this Government, and we will consult on the best ways to do that.
I thank the Minister for her statement. Anyone who has visited a school in their constituency before or after an Ofsted inspection cannot help but know the impact on staff. I welcome this opportunity to reset our relationship with educators and families, because it is so important right now that those young people who are looking to become teachers see it as a worthwhile profession in which they will be welcomed and appreciated by the Government. I hope this is an opportunity for the Minister to work with the education sector and families to build a report system that is fit for purpose and encourages people to work in the education system.
Hear, hear. We know that the system has been letting down children and families, and that we have a shortage of people who want to be teachers. We need to make sure we have a teaching workforce that can deliver the education that every child deserves. My hon. Friend puts it incredibly eloquently, and I very much agree that this is about resetting our system and resetting the Government’s relationship with families, so that they send their children to school and believe that school is the best place for their child, and with teachers, so that they know they are trusted, valued and supported to deliver what I know they went into teaching to deliver, and so that we encourage more people to become teachers.