Pride Month

Chris Vince Excerpts

Thursday 4th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank my hon. Friend for the very important points he makes. I would just like to restate that, as the Supreme Court said, trans people have rights enshrined in law, and we are all duty-bound to uphold and defend those rights.

Unfortunately, the lives of trans people are all too often used as a political football. We have been living in a political climate made infinitely more toxic by the actions of a few. Those unfortunately include some Members of this House, such as representatives of the Reform party who believe that families like mine are not stable. That party appears to be defunding Pride events and tearing down Pride flags across the country. It is also supporting a candidate who reportedly called LGBT+ people fighting for equality “attention seeking”, and said they were

“making a big song and dance about it”.

I am not much of a singer or a dancer, but I am certainly proud to stand with the LGBT+ community, and I refuse to stop working towards equality for every single one of my constituents just because it makes the Reform party uncomfortable.

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

The Minister is giving an incredibly powerful speech, and I am already welling up—even before my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) has started to speak. I just want to say to the Minister that if we did not have the changes in the law that allowed people like her to be in this place, doing what she is doing, this place would be far worse for it, so I welcome her speech.

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank my hon. Friend for that lovely intervention, and for all he does for this House and for his constituents.

--- Later in debate ---

[Stuart Andrew (Daventry) (Con)]

May I begin by apologising to Members? I have sought permission from Mr Speaker to leave early today, because I have a long-standing event in my constituency that I have to attend. I apologise that I will not be here—[Interruption.] It is not to do with Pride, I am afraid. I am very happy to be leaving the rest of this very important debate in the capable hands of my hon. Friend the Member for East Grinstead and Uckfield (Mims Davies).

What a pleasure it is to follow the Minister for Equalities, the hon. Member for Reading West and Mid Berkshire (Olivia Bailey). She made a really great and very personal speech. I am equally grateful, on behalf of His Majesty’s Opposition, to have the opportunity to open this important debate, because Pride Month is a celebration. It is a celebration of the progress that has been made, of the lives lived openly, of families formed, of communities built and of people who no longer have to hide who they are, but it is also a reminder of why that progress was necessary in the first place and why it can never be taken for granted.

For me, this debate is deeply personal. I have seen changes in my lifetime that I could never have imagined when I was growing up as a young gay man on the isle of Anglesey. Back then, community was not always easy to find. I have joked before many times in this House that it often felt like I was literally the only gay in the village. But behind the humour is a serious point: for many people, particularly in small towns, in families, workplaces or faith communities, being LGBT can still feel a very lonely place indeed. That is one of the reasons why Pride still matters.

I am very proud of my good friend and former Member of this House Eric Ollerenshaw, who was one of the first five people on the very first Pride march back in the early 1970s. He describes how, at the time, even the police were spitting at them—just unbelievable when we think about that today. Pride is not only about big parades, flags and public celebrations. It is about the teenager who feels completely alone; it is about the person who is quietly calculating every single word they say. I have spoken before about being attacked and hospitalised when I was younger just because of who I am. Walking down that road, being followed by three men, being called a queer and knowing what was coming next was terrifying. I am so glad that we now live in a country that has changed enormously since then.

[Chris Vince]

In the spirit of this debate, I would like to say to the right hon. Gentleman that, although we might not agree on everything politically, this place is better because he is here and we should recognise that.

--- Later in debate ---

[David Burton-Sampson (Southend West and Leigh) (Lab)]

May I start by saying what an honour it is to speak in this debate and in other similar diversity, equality and inclusion debates? I love the fact that across this House, so many Members come together to support the right cause. It is quite obvious that there is one party whose Members are never here for these debates, and it is the party that says it wants to be in government: the Reform UK party. They cannot be bothered to turn up to express their opinions on these vital debates, and I think that that is absolutely shocking.

It is a little bitter-sweet that I am here today, and I will explain what I mean if you will allow me, Madam Deputy Speaker. I was not meant to be here today. Alongside a number of my colleagues, I was meant to be at the Royal Navy airbase in Yeovilton, but as we all know, a Merlin helicopter crashed yesterday and, sadly, three members of the Royal Navy were killed. For those of us, including my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Tim Roca), who have met these amazing people in recent months and seen their dedication, skill, commitment and teamwork and the camaraderie between them, this is devastating, and we know that they will be feeling absolutely awful and broken. On behalf of the Members of this House and the other place who should have been there today, I send our thoughts to the family, friends and colleagues of those who lost their lives in the line of duty for this country.

Let me turn to the debate today and the very important time that we stand in for the LGBTQ+ community. “What comes after Pride?” Those were the words on a flyer that was posted through my door when I was a councillor in Basildon, with the rainbow flag on the front of it. I thought, “That’s interesting—what’s this?” On the back, it told me that I should repent. I should not be who I was; I should repent. I should convert myself back to being somebody I was not. These flyers did not just come to my house; they went out right across Basildon, where I was a councillor. I got angry, as I am sure many in this House would on receiving such a direct attack on them and their community, especially after the years of discrimination that many of us who are maybe slightly older have gone through in our lives—

[Chris Vince]

No!

[David Burton-Sampson]

Well, I was born in the ’70s!

But I stopped getting angry. I thought, “Let’s turn this into something positive.” I brought together a group of people, and we formed Basildon Mini Pride. In two weeks, we arranged a march through the centre of Basildon town centre to the one local LGBTQ+ nightspot, where we had an afternoon of celebration, and we saw the support there was for us in that community. There is a lot more support than there is hatred. Off the back of that, Basildon Pride was born. I helped to build that into what I am proud to say is a brilliant organisation that operates throughout the year, supporting the LGBTQ+ community in Basildon today. While I might have moved on to Southend, I have remained chair of trustees of Basildon Pride, because it is my baby, and I want to make sure that it continues to thrive and that our amazing volunteers continue to be supported.

Why? Because, as we have heard today, Pride is more important than ever. We have all heard about ILGA-Europe’s rainbow map, showing us consistently sliding from the top place in 2015 down to 22nd place this year. I do not know how others across this place feel, but for me, that is devastating. I have worked hard on the rights of LGBTQ+ people, but I have only made a small contribution. There are many people across this country who, over many years, fought the discrimination we have faced as a community to get us to the great place where we could have civil partnerships, get married and adopt—rights that we did not have—and where hate against us was actually seen as a hate crime. We earned those rights. I stand on the shoulders of giants who fought for those rights before I came along, so it hurts me to see where we are today.

What also hurts me is the rhetoric that we hear across this country today—rhetoric that is driving wedges into our communities, and trying to drive wedges into the LGBTQ+ community. That is not acceptable. Much of that rhetoric comes from Reform UK. I am going to call that party out today, because some of its behaviour in our community is simply unacceptable.

Many buildings will fly the progress pride flag for Pride Month. Last year, Reform UK started threatening law suits against councils that were flying the progress flag. It said that legislation meant that only the rainbow flag, with the six colours, and not the progress pride flag, which includes the triangle that represents the whole LGBTQ+ community, could be flown. Many people have accepted that the progress flag is the flag that we now fly. That flag means so much to so many: when they see it in their community for one day, one week or one month during Pride, they see that we are behind them and we support them.

Reform UK was threatening law suits and councils were having to take that flag down because of a minor difference in the guidance that said that they could fly only the rainbow flag. A group of us are challenging that and working with Ministers at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to try to have the guidance changed. But for goodness’ sake, what does it matter to Reform UK? This is a flag flying that does not harm Reform but shows people in our society that they are included and part of that society. This rhetoric has to stop.

We have seen Reform UK going further in councils that it controls, as has already been mentioned, by taking the rainbow flag down and not allowing it to be flown during Pride Month or at any time. Reform- led councils are even taking the Ukrainian flags down, even though a majority of us in this House are behind supporting people in Ukraine and we show that symbolically by flying that flag across many of our buildings.

--- Later in debate ---

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

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Reading West and Mid Berkshire (Olivia Bailey) and the right hon. Member for Daventry (Stuart Andrew)—I will call him my friend—for starting the debate. I particularly welcome their comments about the importance of healthcare when it comes to supporting our LGBTQ community. Having spoken to LGBTQ+ people in Harlow, I know that there is still a real stigma when it comes to healthcare, and it is really important that we continue to talk about that.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) for her incredibly powerful contribution. I did quite well—I lasted about 10 minutes into her speech before the tears came. She talks about LGBTQ+ rights in a way that is powerful and real. The bit that got me was when she started talking about her constituent’s experiences.

I do not want to get told off for not mentioning Harlow, so I pay tribute to everybody in my constituency who has worked so incredibly hard to make Harlow Pride a success. I feel very sorry for racist and homophobic people, because they miss out on the opportunity to go to some absolutely incredible events. I get to go to Pride events and to religious and cultural events, and I have a bloody good time. I am very proud of that.

I am a proud ally of the LGBTQ+ community, because I truly believe that no one should ever face persecution or abuse for being who they are, or for who they are in love with. That is hugely important. However, I am an LGBTQ+ ally who does not always get it right, and we should be honest with ourselves about that. It is always quite daunting to give the last speech in a debate, as I often do—except when I seconded the King’s Speech; just saying!—but it was particularly daunting today, because every single contribution was absolutely incredible. Every single Member who has spoken in this debate should be incredibly proud of themselves. My hon. Friend the Member for Southend West and Leigh (David Burton-Sampson), who has been a friend of mine for many years, said that he was doing his small part in this debate. No; he does a massive part to support the LGBTQ+ community in his constituency and the wider country, so he should be particularly proud.

I feel quite positive in this space. The last Labour Government introduced civil partnerships and adoption rights, and got rid of the divisive section 28. When I talk to previous teaching colleagues who are gay about section 28, they still shudder at it, and they talk about that time with anxiety and a huge degree of fear. As my hon. Friend said, there was a generation of young people who were terrified to admit who they were, and that must have been absolutely awful. I criticise the last Tory Government for a lot, and I am always wary about being nice about the Tories, because last time I was, the Leader of the Opposition tried to recruit me, which was a bit weird. However, I pay tribute to the last Conservative Government for the equal marriage legislation that they took through Parliament.

I am glad that the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for East Grinstead and Uckfield (Mims Davies), is in her place, because during the LGBT+ History Month debate last year, I had the opportunity to mention my late Uncle Stephen. She and the right hon. Member for Hertsmere (Sir Oliver Dowden), who is not here, said, “Hear, hear” when I mentioned my uncle, and I am genuinely very grateful for that. I again proudly say the name Stephen Vince in this place. He was let down by our society because he was gay, but he was one of the warmest, kindest people I have had the opportunity to know. I am very proud to be able to talk about him, and the fact that he was my uncle. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] Thank you. May he never be forgotten.

However, I also stand here with some fears. My hon. Friend the Member for Southend West and Leigh—he is getting a lot of mentions today—talked about the decision by Reform-led Essex county council to ban Pride advertising in libraries, including in Harlow, and I am very concerned about that. My hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) spoke of his concerns—as did my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West and Leigh, to mention him again—about people, not necessarily from Reform, deciding which books people should be able to read. I say this a little bit in jest, but I think hon. Members will understand why I say it: my son does not want to be a hungry caterpillar. The idea that reading books with LGBTQ+ role models in them will suddenly make young people gay is just nonsense, is it not? Let us be really honest about that.

Those books are really important for young people who are LGBTQ+ and are looking for direction and guidance, but it is also important for people like me to read about the LGBTQ+ community in books, and for that to be commonplace. I am a bit of a “Star Trek” fan—I am going off on a tangent, Madam Deputy Speaker, but this was not so long ago—and I remember how, in “Deep Space Nine”, Jadzia Dax kissed another woman. Do other hon. Members remember that episode? There was outrage, and that is just unbelievable to me. We should be really proud that we live in a society where members of the LGBT community, who should be able to walk down the street holding hands, can do so and not feel the way my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell described.

[Tom Gordon]

I am sure the hon. Gentleman looks fantastic when he turns up to Pride events in the glad rags that I am sure he wears. An interesting thing happened to me a few weeks back when I went for dinner at my mum’s. My little niece was there with my middle sister. My middle sister and I have a very interesting relationship; we do not get along very well. With me, I had a friend—a Liberal Democrat member, who was off out knocking on doors ahead of the local elections—and my little niece, who is at primary school, turned to me and said, “Is that your friend or partner?”. It was an incredibly poignant moment for me, and I thought, “Gosh, I may not necessarily see eye to eye with my sister, but she’s done a good job raising her kid.” Does my hon. Friend agree that the world is a better place when kids have an open mind and can ask such questions, and are inquisitive and not hateful?

[Chris Vince]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention, although I do not thank him for overtaking me in the marathon on mile 5—a long way ahead of the right hon. Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Holden). The insight into the hon. Gentleman’s family Christmases is fascinating, but he makes a valid point, as he often does in this place. He gives me the opportunity to mention that I used to be a teacher, which I have not done yet today—[Laughter.] I thank him for that. [Interruption.] I did not teach in Harlow, actually! I think about when I first started teaching in 2005, up until when I finished teaching in 2020. I did see that shift. When I first started teaching, a young person who was openly gay would have been subject to ridicule. I am not saying that we are in a perfect world where that no longer happens, but I certainly saw more young people at school in 2020 who were happy to be open about their sexuality, and that is something we should celebrate.

There are challenges, too. I do not want to end on a negative, but I have just started reading Esther Ghey’s book about the horrendous murder of her daughter. It shows the horrendous impact of transphobia and we need to be really mindful of that, although equally there is hope.

[Jen Craft (Thurrock) (Lab)]

As a fellow Essex MP, I too was shocked by the decision taken by Essex county council on displaying Pride and LGBT+ material in libraries. Today I learned that, unfortunately, it appears that my own council of Thurrock, which is now run by Reform UK, seems to have directed the removal of Pride advertisements and LGBT+ awareness material from the Thameside complex in Grays. Ironically, the complex will be hosting Pride in June, which the Pride organisation in Thurrock is paying for fully. Does my hon. Friend agree that this is a real backward step in what should be a safe space for the LGBTQ+ community in Thurrock?

[Chris Vince]

I thank my honourable bestie for her contribution. I absolutely agree with everything she has just said. I send my solidarity to members of Thurrock Pride and thank them for all they do. As my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West and Leigh mentioned earlier—I will mention him again—all the Pride groups across the country are hugely important. They make a difference to all our constituents who may be LGBTQ+ and are perhaps wary because of some of the things we have talked about today. They do a huge amount to support people with their mental wellbeing and to make them feel part of the community, so I really want to thank them for that.

I will say to my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) that there is also hope. The hope is all around us, because there has been representation in this debate from five political parties—I think I have counted that up right—with, yes, one notable absence. We should have pride that, whatever differences we may have, we all agree that it is hugely important that we support our LBGTQ+ colleagues, so I feel there is some hope.

Finally, I am saddened by what my hon. Friends the Members for Thurrock and for Southend West and Leigh mentioned about some of the decisions being made by councils that have recently changed political affiliation. It looks as though we will have to fight the battles of the past with regard to LGBTQ+ rights, but I say to everybody who has spoken in this debate that if we have to fight those fights again, we will fight those fights again and I will stand there and fight with you.

Children’s Social Care: Enduring Relationships Strategy

Chris Vince Excerpts

Thursday 4th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Josh MacAlister]

I thank my hon. Friend for her questions. We are announcing today that the Family Finding programme will be extended and taken further, and the aim is to have it rolled out across the whole of England within the next two years. The procurement for that starts today, and it will be swift. We are looking to find an organisation that will not just support us to deliver a pilot or programme that sits alongside, or on top of, existing services—as has been done over the last few years—but work with local areas to embed in the core of how social workers and PAs are currently operating the features of those sorts of models, so that this becomes completely mainstream within the next two years. That is a bold goal, but we absolutely need to help shift the time and practice of social workers and PAs. We will need to make changes to some of the statutory guidance and regulation in order to free up social workers and PAs to be able to do that, but that is absolutely the right decision.

On deprivation of liberty orders, we will look really closely at the Supreme Court judgment earlier this week, but we do not expect that it will have any material impact on the Home Again programme that we are looking to roll out this summer. Finally, I would be delighted to congratulate the fostering team in my hon. Friend’s local authority. I was inspired when I saw their videos.

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

I think the Minister will achieve great things in his role, and he has already achieved great things, but this could be the most significant. The difference that the strategy is going to make—not only to young people leaving care, but to kinship carers—is absolutely massive. His dedication is borne out not just by the actions that he is taking, but by the short timescale in which he wants to achieve these things, and I give credit to him. He is someone who knows the difference between a care leaver and a young carer—the number of people who do not is shocking. I talk to a lot of young people leaving care in my constituency of Harlow, and it strikes me that they are running the race of life but starting at least 10 metres behind everybody else. As this is the final question, can the Minister do a pitch to care leavers in Harlow about the difference that the strategy will make to their lives?

[Josh MacAlister]

I thank my hon. Friend for getting Harlow into his question. It is a really good question to end on, because I want young people in care, care leavers and care-experienced people in this country to know that we are now working towards a common goal that is supported across the House. We will ensure that they get people in their lives who love them—not lanyard-wearing professionals, who are important, but their own tribe. We need to get that right as a country, and I absolutely believe we can, because all the examples I have shared, and all the things in the strategy, are already happening across England. It is a case of spreading and mainstreaming them. If we can do that, it will completely transform outcomes—for example, for young people not in education, employment or training. It will improve mental health and bring down the number of young care-experienced people who complete suicide, and it will mean that we are lucky enough as a country to have these brilliant young people celebrated and achieving.

Young Adult Carers: Education and Training

Chris Vince Excerpts

Thursday 23rd April 2026 Westminster Hall

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

I beg to move,

That this House has considered access to education and training for young adult carers.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. Before I start, I want to declare that I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for young carers and young adult carers. Throughout my contribution, I will refer to the APPG’s recent report on removing the barriers to higher education, employment and training for young adult carers, and I thank the Carers Trust, the APPG’s secretariat, for publishing it. I also thank the vice-chair, the hon. Member for Mid Sussex (Alison Bennett), who sadly cannot be here because she is on Bench duty.

I particularly want to thank the young carers who contributed to the report—in particular, our co-chairs, Farzana, Bakoory and Danny, and also Ashleigh, Jahnavi, Sammi, Becca, Elaroop, Emma, Isla, Joanne, Lewis, Luna, Ruby, Sammie-Jo, Tariq and Zaynab, for their really important contributions. Anecdotally, if you ever find yourself on a panel of speakers with a young carer or young adult carer, I would advise going first, Mrs Harris. If you find yourself, as I did at my party’s conference this year, speaking directly after a young adult carer—in this case, Farzana—you will find that anything that you have to say absolutely lacks impact, because the young adult carer will have said something far more powerful and, in my case, far more intelligent.

As chair of the APPG, a former teacher and a young carer lead for Action for Family Carers—a charity based not only in my constituency of Harlow but across Essex—I am keen to talk about educational opportunities for young carers and young adult carers. As you will be aware, Mrs Harris—I mention this quite often—I was a secondary school teacher. Having had conversations with young carers and young adult carers, I felt it was important to focus the APPG report on the transition from school to further and higher education, training and employment. As the Minister knows, that fits nicely with the Government’s aims. I know that this falls under a different Department, but I am sure he will work with the Work and Pensions Secretary on the Alan Milburn report, which will recognise the importance of tackling people not in education, employment or training. He will recognise that a higher proportion of young carers and young adult carers are NEET, for reasons I will highlight in my speech.

What we found from the young adult carers who came to the APPG and spoke about their experiences of going into higher education is that they face a number of barriers, some of which I will come to. I was really struck by the fact that when they applied for university, they did not feel there were models—not exactly role models, but models of young carers and young adult carers going on to university—they could learn and get aspiration from. It was really interesting to hear that. Of course, young adult carers going on to university face other issues, which I hope to touch on in my speech.

The APPG’s previous inquiry into young carers, which took place in 2023, before I entered this place, heard that more than 40,000 young adult carers are caring for their loved ones for more than 50 hours per week. In our recent inquiry, we heard from 198 young carers and young adult carers, and only a quarter said they had the same access to opportunities in education—particularly higher and further education. Some 73% said they felt they were falling behind their peers in education, and 79% said caring had a huge impact on their mental health and is a key factor impacting their career plans. I will quote one particular young adult carer, who said:

“At one point, it felt like I would never be able to live my own life or make decisions that didn’t directly benefit”

the health of the person they cared for.

While I have this opportunity, I want to thank all the organisations that took part in the inquiry, such as MYTIME Young Carers in Bournemouth, Action for Family Carers in Essex, the Carers Trust, of course, and other partners. We received representations from carers in Gloucester and Sheffield, as well as in Northern Ireland, and I look forward to hearing a contribution about Northern Ireland later.

MYTIME Young Carers recognises that there is often pressure to stay at home and not access further education, training or employment. For young adult carers, distance is often a key motivating factor when choosing which university to go to, with two fifths choosing to stay at home when studying. The nature of higher and further education in this country means that that decision can have a key impact on what that young person chooses to study and on their other life chances, given that they do not have a full range of choices when it comes to university. MYTIME Young Carers also recognises the challenges young adult carers have in meeting deadlines, which is also cited in the report, as Members might expect.

I will move on to some of the report’s recommendations, and I would be grateful to hear the Minister’s thoughts on them. The first recommendation, which is key for not only young adult carers looking to access higher education, further education, employment or training but all young carers, is to improve the identification of carers. I often tell the story, from my time as a teacher, of when I was unaware that a young person in my class was a young carer until it came to parents evening; I think that that is particularly relevant and moving. That is an issue for not only secondary schools but higher and further education institutions, and it is perhaps even more of a challenge in universities, where the same relationship is not necessarily built with teachers as in schools. It is also important to improve the support for young adult carers in education.

I am delighted to have a fantastic school called Mark Hall Academy in my constituency, which does some fantastic work to support young carers. I would emphasise the importance of having a young carers lead in every school to support young carers not only in school itself but in any transition they make moving forward, and with careers advice.

Secondly, there is removal of financial barriers. A report has come out today that talks about the 21-hour rule, and I would be interested to hear the Minister’s views on that. I would also ask the Department for Work and Pensions to provide financial solutions so that young adult carers do not have to choose between caring and learning.

We should also improve young carers’ access to employment and training opportunities. Again, I welcome the Milburn report, but I would call for a cross-Government carers strategy to ensure that young carers and young adult carers are a key thread in everything the Government do. I would also ask the Minister and Ministers from the DWP to work with the Department of Health and Social Care to ensure that local authorities can meet their statutory obligations on transition assessments, so that they provide assessments for all young adult carers and, of course, age-appropriate support on top of that.

I would also like to talk about the importance of improving data about young adult carers. We need to be led by the data. In Essex, for example, there are 10,000 young carers and young adult carers. I suspect that the number is actually much higher, because many young carers do not necessarily recognise that they are young carers. Again, I emphasise that any reporting on NEETs should include whether people have caring responsibilities.

I feel passionately about this subject. From day one in this place, I have been determined to ensure that I continue to be a champion for young carers and young adult carers, as I was in my previous role. None of us could fail to recognise the hugely important role of young carers and young adult carers, not just in supporting their loved ones but in the wider community.

When we talk about young carers and young adult carers, many people talk about the huge economic benefits they provide. If these young people did not take on that caring responsibility, there would be a greater number of admissions to hospital and a greater cost to the NHS. I do not like to think about it like that, because that is not why young carers and young adult carers care for their loved ones; they do it for love, don’t they? Equally, we must make sure that they are supported as much as possible throughout their lives, not just at school but as they transition to higher education, training and employment.

I thank the Backbench Business Committee—I am a member of it, so I would say that—for allowing me to have this debate, and I look forward to hearing the contributions from other Members, including the shadow Minister and the Minister.

--- Later in debate ---

[Chris Vince]

I thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for his powerful contribution and for recognising the sacrifice that young carers and young adult carers make. As the Minister said, he made it personal and very real for us. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore) for his contribution. Some universities and higher education colleges do support young carers very well, and that is hugely important. During our APPG’s inquiry, we heard representations from Liverpool University, the Open University and others that want to get this issue right.

I thank the hon. Member for Harpenden and Berkhamsted (Victoria Collins) for recognising the unique challenges facing young adult carers. Having worked in the charity sector, I often found that although there is funding to support young carers or adult carers, that middle group is not supported. There is a big difference between a 21-year-old supporting a loved one and an older person doing so. That is an important point to make.

I thank the hon. Member for Meriden and Solihull East (Saqib Bhatti) for his kind words. He is not a bad bloke—for a Man United supporter. I recognise the genuine attempt by the previous Government to improve the data on young carers, but we need to do more to make sure that schools fill in that census properly. I think that 69% of schools still say that they do not have any young carers, which we just know is not correct. The hon. Member rightly recognised the importance of the Government working to improve that data.

I thank the Minister for his contribution. He will be finishing the marathon at least two hours quicker than me on Sunday. He correctly recognised the importance of better inclusion in schools for young adult carers and of improving the data. I welcome Ofsted—that is a rare thing for a former teacher to say—and its focus on young carers. The Minister is right that schools have a number of challenges and things they need to focus on. They cannot do everything, but making sure that it is in the Ofsted framework will ensure that schools focus on the issue.

This needs to be a cross-party and cross-Department conversation. I recognise the Minister’s comments about bursaries and maintenance grants, and appreciate his commitment to talk to Alan Milburn about his inquiry. He recognises the challenges posed by the 21-hour rule, and has endeavoured to go away and look at that. I am happy to attend any meetings he is having with anybody, because he is a very good Minister.

Finally, huge thanks to everyone who has participated in the debate. I hope that it has been productive. I am sure that we will continue to have conversations about young carers and young adult carers. I certainly intend to, and we have some positive steps to move forward with.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered access to education and training for young adult carers.

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Chris Vince Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank my hon. Friend for his important intervention and for all his work for his constituents in Reading Central.

To underline the fact that we will act quickly, we have committed to responding to the consultation by the summer and have made a legislative commitment to report to Parliament within six months.

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

I thank the Minister for giving way; she is being generous with her time, as always. I declare an interest as a member of the Select Committee. I hope that I do not steal the thunder of the Chair of the Select Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), who is sitting next to me. Yesterday we received evidence from representatives of social media companies and from academics, although we were all hugely disappointed that one social media company did not provide representation. Does the Minister agree that whatever the Government decide when it comes to social media—whether it is restricted, banned or an age restriction is put in place—it is hugely important that young people learn about the dangers? We must ensure that goes into the expanded school curriculum, as discussed in the White Paper.

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank my hon. Friend for his work. I do agree with him; this is an important point. The issue is a part of our revised national curriculum and also the relationships, sex and health education curriculum.

I am grateful for the engagement of peers and Members across the House on this vital topic. As a result, we have made a number of other changes that strengthen our position, including clarifying that this power can only be exercised to protect children from online harm and that we will share draft regulations with Select Committees and Opposition spokespeople. I welcome the constructive engagement from Lord Nash and the Conservatives as we come to a solution on our small areas of difference. I can assure the House that we intend to return to these matters on Monday in the other place and put beyond doubt the Government’s plans to act and to do so swiftly.

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Chris Vince Excerpts

Wednesday 15th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank my hon. Friend for his important work, both on the Education Committee and for his constituents. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State will meet the Chair of the Committee soon, and we commit to working with it.

Let me turn to Government amendment 105B, on allergies in schools. I thank everybody who has worked so hard campaigning on this issue. They include my hon. Friend the Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore), the hon. Member for Rutland and Stamford (Alicia Kearns), and other Members from both Houses. I particularly thank the fantastic Helen Blythe, the Benedict Blythe Foundation, and the wide range of allergy safety charities that have engaged with the Government on this matter.

As I promised when the Bill was last before this House, we have introduced a Government amendment to place allergy safety on a statutory footing for all schools. It requires all schools to have allergy safety policies, to review them regularly, and to publicise and publish them. Schools must have regard to the statutory guidance, which we have co-produced with expert stakeholders. Through regulations, we will put in place duties covering the content of allergy safety policies, stocking adrenalin devices, securing allergy awareness training, and incident reporting. Benedict’s law, named in memory of Helen Blythe’s son Benedict, is intended to ensure that every child with allergies can attend school safely.

Let me turn to Lords amendments 38 and 106, which relate to social media and phones in schools. Protecting children online is a priority for this Government, and the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology have made it clear that it is a matter of how, not if, the Government will act to deliver further protections for children and young people.

Whereas the amendment proposed in the House of Lords is narrow, our consultation will allow us to address a much wider range of services and features. It will also allow us to consider different views on the way forward. It is crucial that we do not pre-empt the Government’s consultation, which will close next month.

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

I welcome the consultation that the Minister is holding on this important issue. I declare an interest, as I am a member of the Education Committee—that seems to be something we should mention—and I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for young carers and young adult carers. Will she ensure that as this consultation progresses, the voices of young carers are heard? That is really important.

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank my hon. Friend for his work supporting young carers. I can give him that promise, and I am happy to arrange any meetings that he would like with my colleagues in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology.

The Government amendments to the Bill will allow us to act quickly and respond directly to the consultation. There will not be endless rounds of consultation; the Government will act. We have listened to the concerns raised in both Houses regarding a desire for swift action, a more specific power and appropriate scrutiny.

SEND Provision and Reform

Chris Vince Excerpts

Monday 13th April 2026 Commons Chamber

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

I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way and for bringing this really important debate to the Chamber. I recognise his passion for supporting young people with SEND, but I disagree with his views on the Government’s White Paper. I say that not because I am sitting on this side of the Chamber, but as a former teacher who worked with a system that did work and that was very similar to the system that is being put forward. I would question the hon. Gentleman’s point about legal enforcement and EHCPs, because even when children did get EHCPs, the schools just were not able to provide what the EHCP demanded. Whether it was a legal requirement or not, those schools were just not able to provide it. I ask the hon. Gentleman to reflect on that.

[Gregory Stafford]

Given the time available, I will probably not take too many more interventions. On the hon. Gentleman’s point, it is a strange argument that, because a child has been legally given an EHCP that requires a certain level of support but, for whatever reason—whether through the school, perhaps, or the local authority—that cannot be provided, we should therefore water down their legal rights.

When the current system works—and it does work in places—it is transformational. One parent in my constituency wrote:

“We are incredibly relieved. I have received the final copy of the EHCP, and the school is now implementing it. It has been a long road.”

--- Later in debate ---

[Saqib Bhatti]

My hon. Friend makes the same point that has been made to me by many parents about the one-size-fits-all approach of these reforms. I want to give the Minister the opportunity to try to reassure some of those parents, because parents want answers and the children and families who are affected deserve them.

I have spoken to many parents and representative groups. There is a huge amount of anxiety about these reforms—a view that is shared by many parent-carer forums—which has not been helped by the delay to the White Paper or the drip-drip briefings suggesting that EHCPs would simply be scrapped. The Conservative position is clear: any reforms that come forward must enshrine parental rights in law and the Government must not water down those rights.

[Chris Vince]

On that point, will the shadow Minister give way?

[Saqib Bhatti]

I will.

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Chris Vince Excerpts

Monday 9th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Olivia Bailey]

Children’s voices are heard rarely in this place and are too often ignored in our society, so I say at the outset that it is truly a special privilege to play my part in the passage of this landmark legislation. This Bill is about creating the conditions in which every child can achieve and thrive, to ensure safer and more secure childhoods, to tackle the scrouge of child poverty and to deliver high and rising school standards. Today I ask the House to renew its commitment to that ambition for our children and our country. I extend my thanks to my colleague and friend, Baroness Smith of Malvern, the Minister for Skills, for her skilful stewardship of the Bill. I ask hon. Members to back the Government amendments made in the other place that increase the ambition of the legislation.

In part 1 of the Bill, we have introduced a new duty on local housing authorities to, with consent, notify educational institutions, GP practices and health visiting services when a child is placed in temporary accommodation. We have also strengthened the Government’s work to put the voices of children at the heart of decisions about their futures, with amendments on family group decision making and the kinship local offer.

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

On that point, will the Minister give way?

[Olivia Bailey]

Sorry, but I have to make progress as I have so much to get through.

Turning to part 2 of the Bill and schools, we are taking forward our historic strategy to lift children out of poverty. As my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan) set out last year, from September all children in households receiving universal credit will be eligible for free school meals. That will put £500 back in families’ pockets, support 500,000 more children with a nutritious meal and lift 100,000 children out of poverty. That is the difference that this Labour Government are making for children and families. We are supporting this by upgrading the eligibility checking system, making it much easier for local authorities, schools and parents to confirm free school meal eligibility.

Finally, the Government are also enabling the introduction of academy trust inspection and giving powers to the Secretary of State where academy trusts are not meeting acceptable standards.

I will now turn to the 13 non-Government amendments made in the other place, first the amendments relating to child protection. On Lords amendment 2, statutory guidance is already clear that a multi-agency conference should take place to review whether the child protection plan should be discharged. On Lords amendment 5, effective multi-agency child protection practices that prevent tragedies and save lives needs to happen now—further delay is unacceptable. In addition, evaluation is already under way, and regulations to give multi-agency child protection teams their functions will be subject consultation and parliamentary scrutiny.

--- Later in debate ---

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

I rise to speak to the Lords amendments to the Bill that are of most interest to the Education Committee, following our scrutiny work on the Bill and in relation to a number of other subsequent and ongoing inquiries.

I welcome the decision to place the expansion of the entitlement to free school meals in the Bill. The Education Committee welcomes that expansion, which will increase the number of children who can benefit from a nutritious hot meal in the middle of the day. Combined with the roll-out of free breakfast clubs, it will substantially reduce the scourge of hunger, which harms children’s health and holds back their learning.

My Committee has recommended that the Government introduce auto-enrolment for free school meals. The use of universal credit data, which the Government already hold, would make auto-enrolment much easier to achieve. I urge the Minister to ensure, by implementing auto-enrolment, that no child misses out on the meal to which they are entitled.

I welcome the introduction of a requirement to notify health and education services when a child is placed in temporary accommodation. I have seen at first hand many times in my constituency the destabilising impact of temporary accommodation on children’s lives. It is usually the worst quality accommodation and is the most likely to be overcrowded, damp and mouldy. It is often far away from school and friends, with no space to do homework, and brings the constant underlying insecurity of not having a permanent home. It can have profound consequences for children’s health and education, and the new duty to notify is an important first step in ensuring that children can be supported.

[Chris Vince]

I declare an interest, as a member of the Education Committee and a former teacher. I thank the Chair of the Committee for her passionate speech. Does she agree that it is hugely important that teachers are aware when young people in their care are in temporary accommodation, because of the huge impact it can have on their education, as she has suggested?

[Helen Hayes]

I agree with my hon. Friend entirely. So often we hear from teachers that they recognise a drop in a student’s engagement or performance, but without understanding why.

I welcome the introduction of the new requirements on allergy safety in schools. As the parent of a child who had unexplained allergies in early childhood, I understand some of the fear and anxiety that parents experience when entrusting a child with allergies to a formal setting. There is anxiety about whether allergens will be properly managed, and anxiety about what will happen if their child experiences an allergic reaction. The new requirements will ensure that there is more consistency, improve knowledge and introduce better protocols for managing allergies in schools, so that parents and schools can have more confidence.

I turn to Lords amendment 17 on siblings and foster care. In the Education Committee’s inquiry into children’s social care last year, we heard directly from young people with recent experience of the care system. They told us about the profound impacts of sibling separation. Sibling relationships are very important for looked-after children, who often have experienced trauma and broken relationships with their parents and other family members. Yet far too often, siblings are separated by a care system that struggles, due to funding and lack of capacity, to deliver child-centred care. My Committee was shocked to discover that the Department for Education gathers no data on sibling separation. That is a first and necessary step in seeking to reduce it.

I appreciate that the Government are not yet content with the wording of the amendment on sibling contact, but I urge them to find a way to incorporate stronger requirements for sibling contact to be prioritised and maintained before the Bill reaches the statute book. It is a small change concerning something that should happen anyway, and has the potential to make a big difference to vulnerable children in the care system.

In the short time that remains to me, let me mention just two other matters. The first is the amendment relating to school uniform costs for families. I know what a strain those can be for families who are struggling with the cost of living, and I welcome the Government’s efforts to limit the costs, but I urge the Minister to give a further assurance about the risks of the high costs of specific items. I encountered an egregious case in my constituency, in which a child from an extremely low-income background had been given a place at a school but was told that she could not attend unless she had the appropriate blazer, the cost of which was £100. I hope the Minister can give an indication that the guidance for schools will be strengthened in this regard.

I support robust measures to protect children from social media harms, including raising the age of digital consent and a ban on some social media apps for under-16s, and I support a statutory ban in schools.

Oral Answers to Questions

Chris Vince Excerpts

Monday 19th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Georgia Gould]

As I set out, we have heard that too many families across the country are having to fight for, and wait for, support. That is not acceptable, which is why we are bringing forward the investment in early intervention that we have talked about today: the £3 billion for specialist places, the £200 million for teacher training, and the Best Start hubs. But we know that more needs to be done, which is why we are having a national conversation about SEND and will be bringing forward reforms.

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

I note that the Minister has not been to Harlow yet. [Laughter.] Families in Harlow have completely lost faith in the SEND system that we inherited. I do not think that it is too much of a stretch to suggest that parents are suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder after battling to get support for their children. Will she outline, based on the specialist places she mentioned in a previous answer, what the Government are doing to ensure that we have a system that does not pit families, and indeed education professionals, against a system that is broken?

[Georgia Gould]

I will make sure that that oversight is corrected as soon as possible—although, I am not sure that my hon. Friend has actually invited me to Harlow yet, but I know the Prime Minister has been. My hon. Friend has written to me with stories of parents fighting the system—I have heard many like them—completely exhausted and often having to give up their jobs in order to fight for support for their children. It is just not good enough. We recognise that support needs to be available much earlier, we are investing in it, and that is the basis of the reforms that we will be bringing forward.

Early Education and Childcare

Chris Vince Excerpts

Thursday 4th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

Finally, I call Chris Vince.

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

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. You are still a national treasure to me. I thank the Minister for his important statement, which will make a huge difference to young people and families in my constituency. Over recess, I held a roundtable for parents of SEND children in Harlow. The No. 1 thing that they said would support their children was early intervention to ensure they have the best possible start in life, which will support them in schools and later in employment. Will the Minister guarantee that this early intervention—this proactive approach to childcare and education—will be a golden thread that runs through this Labour Government?

[Stephen Morgan]

I thank my hon. Friend for his proactivity in bringing parents together to hear their thoughts and views. We are a Government who are listening to what parents tell us, and we want to act to ensure that every child gets the best start in life. He is absolutely right that investing in early education and supporting early intervention around any additional needs that children have are vital in ensuring that every child gets the best possible outcomes and life chances. I know that he will continue to work with us to make sure that happens in his constituency and across the country.

Giving Every Child the Best Start in Life

Chris Vince Excerpts

Wednesday 16th July 2025 Commons Chamber

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

Everybody wants to give children the best start in life. That is why we increased spending per pupil in schools by 11% in real terms in the last Parliament, and why we doubled real-terms spending on the free entitlement for the early years. More importantly, it is why we pushed through difficult reforms to schools, which were often opposed by the Labour party. It is why we brought in the knowledge-rich curriculum, why we brought in stronger accountability, and why we pushed through the academies revolution and more parental choice.

The Minister said that our record speaks for itself, and it does. Labour’s record speaks for itself as well. Between 2009 and 2022, England went from 21st to seventh in the programme for international student assessment league table for maths, while Wales—spending the same amount as before—went from 29th to 27th. [Interruption.] Labour MPs clearly do not like hearing this, but I am afraid I am going to carry on. In science, England went from 11th to ninth, while Wales—with same amount of money as before but run by Labour, with no reforms—slumped from 21st to 29th.

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

On that point, will the shadow Minister give way?

[Neil O’Brien]

I am happy to take an intervention.

[Chris Vince]

I thank the shadow Minister for taking my intervention; he is always very generous with his time. I will give him a friendly intervention. I was going to criticise the Conservatives for a lack of attendance in this debate, but he said the words “no reforms”, and I notice that there are no Reform MPs present for this important debate. When I spoke in the general election campaign about education and it was the turn of the Reform candidate in Harlow to give us his views on the party’s vision for education, he did not have an answer. Does the shadow Minister agree that we do not want the Reform party anywhere near education?

[Neil O’Brien]

The hon. Gentleman is completely right, and it is not the first time—it is generally the case that no one from Reform is present. On this issue, I am afraid that Reform MPs are chronically absent, as we say in education.

I will continue with my theme. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has pointed out that the huge difference in performance, and the divergence in performance, between England and Wales cannot be explained by poverty rates or ethnicity. It is to do with the reforms that were not undertaken because of trade union pressure in Wales.

[Neil O’Brien]

I do not think that is true. Looking at the evidence pack produced by the Government’s curriculum review, it is clear that some of the arguments are overstated. It is true that we reversed the decline in the number of young people taking double and triple science; that had been falling for years, and it went back up again because there was more focus on science. It is true that there are a limited number of hours in the school day, but I do not accept that we had some sort of Gradgrindian educational agenda. There continues to be a broad and balanced agenda. If Labour Members want to say that much more time should be spent on a particular subject, they should at least be clear about where it will come from.

Children in England were ranked the best in maths in the whole western world in the 2023 trends in international mathematics and science study, and they moved into the top five in the global rankings for science. What happened in Wales and Scotland? We do not know, as their Administrations removed themselves from those competitions because they do not like accountability. It is the same at all levels.

Whereas we favoured parental choice and autonomy for schools, balanced by strong accountability, the current Government take a very different approach. The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which is currently in the Lords, dilutes parental choice, and it gives local politicians more control over pupil numbers for the first time since 1988. The greater autonomy for schools that we brought in has been replaced by a tide of micromanagement of curriculum and staff, and the absurd situation where if someone wants to put up a bicycle shed they have to apply to the Secretary of State. On the other hand, the ultimate form of accountability—placing schools under new management via academy orders—is being slowed down and stopped, which has been criticised even by Labour MPs such as the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh).

The Labour party’s attempts to mess around with Ofsted to please the trade unions have watered down accountability for parents and made things more complicated, but they have not made anybody happy; nobody is happy with what has been proposed in the end. The Government have axed all the forms of support that we were making available to schools for subjects from advanced physics to maths, Latin and advanced computing—they think they are elitist. They have also axed the behaviour hubs, even though there is clear evidence that they were working and schools that went through them were twice as likely to be good or outstanding afterwards. The reform agenda is just not there.

At one point, the Government’s big answer was that they were going to employ 6,500 more teachers: they were going to increase VAT and employ all these extra teachers. The Chancellor said at the end of last year that every single penny of that VAT increase would go to education, but then, confusingly, the Prime Minister said that the money had been spent on social housing instead. It has been a long time since I studied formal logic, but we cannot spend every single penny on education and also spend that money on housing; we cannot spend it on two things. As it happens, we now know that actually there are not those extra teachers; there are 400 fewer teachers. We added 27,000 teachers under the last Government and under Labour there are 400 fewer teachers.

At the point when the numbers came out showing that there were fewer teachers, the Government suddenly declared that primary school teachers do not count—that the fall of 2,900 in primary school teacher numbers did not count. Ministers implied that that had always been their intention—they said, “How dare you say that wasn’t our intention?”—but they announced this policy in a primary school, and they said they would hit their targets for early years through an increase in primary. Now they say, “Oh, numbers are falling in primary,” but numbers are falling by a lot less than when they made the pledge in the updated forecast. If we apply the same logic, half of secondary schools have falling numbers, so perhaps that will be the next way they try to monkey around with the numbers to pretend that the opposite is happening. I would not mind so much if we did not get these chirpy press releases from the Department saying, “We’re doing so well; we’ve got all these extra teachers.” There are fewer teachers—that is the bottom line in what has happened here.

[Chris Vince]

I thank the shadow Minister for giving way again; he is being very generous with his time. I have to say, as a former teacher who left the profession because of the way we were treated by the previous Government, that I always feel a little bit gaslit by the Conservative party. I would just point out to him that during the previous Government’s time in office, a third of new teachers were leaving the profession within five years. Does he not recognise that the pressure put on teachers by the previous Government, the lack of support and the general lack of faith in teachers made a number of them leave, and we lost so much experience that it has been very difficult to get back?

[Neil O’Brien]

There are several things to say about that. The first is that the overall number went up: the hon. Gentleman said that some were leaving, but the overall number went up by 27,000. He makes a good point about early career teachers and that is why we put in the early career framework, which I do think is a big improvement. It is not that there is nothing in what the hon. Gentleman said, but I do think it is funny for him to stand up and talk about gaslighting when the Government are pumping out glossy propaganda saying that there are more teachers, even though their own Department for Education website says that there are 400 fewer teachers. So do tell me all about gaslighting.

My broader worry about the Government’s approach to giving every child the best start in life is that it misses the wood for the trees. Ministers like to talk about some of the small interventions they are making, such as the £33 million they are spending on breakfast clubs and the “best start in life” centres and the increases in spending there. But on the other side of the ledger, how is this being paid for? It is being paid for with a £25 billion increase in national insurance, and, unbelievably for a notionally social democratic Government, that national insurance increase is brutally targeted on the lowest income workers. It is incredible.