(1 week, 4 days ago)
Commons ChamberI thank my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Leigh Ingham) for bringing this important debate to the House. Being picked last was very much my experience of PE at school. It is interesting that the majority of people who have spoken in this debate are not very good at sport. There is a rule in the parliamentary football team that MPs have to start. I have to say that I am the footballer who has pushed that rule to its limits, leading to the question: “How quickly can we sub Chris off and bring on a better player?”
Before this debate, on the suggestion of my hon. Friend for Stafford, I reached out to some of my local schools in Harlow to hear about their good practice and to find out about some of the challenges they face. People will know that Harlow has a proud history of sporting excellence. It is the childhood town of Glenn Hoddle, the birthplace of Laura Trott—not the right hon. Member for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott)—who is now Laura Kenny. I have to mention long-distance runner Michael Casey, because he is now a local journalist, and my sporting hero, the Paralympian Anne Strike MBE.
Two schools were very quick to get back to me about what they are doing in Harlow. I thank Luke Hammond, the PE lead from Purford Green primary school, for his quick response and what he shared from his school and the wider Passmores Co-operative Learning Community, which is a strong advocate for physical education. He told me that they have done up to 70 events in the past year alone. They purchased and lent out bikes as part of a Bikeability programme and created their own sporting event—I believe it is called tchoukball—and a dedicated festival to support SEND students to do PE, as well as a girls-only tag rugby tournament where over 150 students participated. He particularly wanted to pay tribute not just to the staff in his school, but to the staff in primary schools and schools across Harlow who work collaboratively in coalition to support one another.
My hon. Friend the Member for Mid Cheshire (Andrew Cooper) mentioned the decision by the coalition Government in 2010. I have to say that I am old enough to have been teaching at the time of that change, although I am pleased that Jerounds primary school in my constituency continues to excel in ensuring students have at least two PE lessons a week. It also invites sports- people into the school, including representatives of Essex cricket club, which we know is the best cricket team in the country—there are not enough people to boo that.
My hon. Friend makes a brilliant case for access to sport. I could challenge him on his last claim, but he is such a doughty champion for Harlow, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Leigh Ingham), who brought us together for the debate. Does he agree that sometimes school sport can fall off when we talk about elitism, elite athletes, the Olympics and all that? Will he champion the Culture, Media and Sport Committee report that we are working on? We took evidence the other day. It is on community and school sport and the challenges facing sports clubs and under-represented groups. Schools are central to that, and as an ex-teacher, I know he will agree.
My hon. Friend mentioned that I was a teacher before I did—oh no, I did mention it.
Thank you.
My hon. Friend makes an important point, and what is interesting from hon. Members’ contributions is that none of us particularly excel at sport—I certainly do not—but we have seen sometimes in later life how important participation in sport is. She is right that it is not just about elitist sport; we could talk about Harlow Parkrun where people come together as a community and take part in sport every Saturday morning. There are so many examples where sport does not need to be elitist. Of course we want people to excel at sport, and of course we want the next Laura Kenny or Glenn Hoddle, but we want people to enjoy sport: the impact it has on their mental health is huge. I thank my hon. Friend for the work she is doing on the Select Committee to champion that point, and I look forward to that being fed into the curriculum review.
Increased transport costs are among the biggest challenges that teachers have raised with me. For some Harlow parents struggling financially, and low-income families, transporting their children to away fixtures is just not possible.
My hon. Friend the Member for Stafford—and the other bits—mentioned the Lionesses. We have all been inspired by Lucy Bronze and others in that team, and young girls in Harlow have been inspired by them as well. However, many girls and young women in Harlow have to leave Harlow to go to Bishop’s Stortford, of all places, to access sport, so we clearly need to do more to ensure that sports facilities are readily available and close enough for everybody to go to them.
As someone who is not the most sporty person in the world but appreciates the value of sport, my plea to the Government is to invest in PE in our schools, because it helps develop skills such as resilience and physical and mental health, as mentioned previously. It should not be just for elite athletes; it should be for everybody to enjoy—even slightly over-the-hill former maths teachers.
Before I call the Front Benchers, it is important to put on the record that I, too, was always picked last. I call Max Wilkinson.
(1 week, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I thank the hon. Gentleman for welcoming the fund. We will announce further details to the House in coming days and open the fund for applications as soon as possible. I will continue to work closely with my Treasury colleagues.
I thank the Minister for coming to the House to answer the urgent question. I know from her visit to Harlow last week how much she cares about supporting young people. Having worked in the charity sector before I came to this place, I recognise that short-termism in funding for services to support vulnerable people is not a new problem. Will she confirm that the Government are committed to ensuring that adopted children are given the support they deserve?
(2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberInformation on that will come out in due course, but if the right hon. Member gives me a little more time, I will be able to elaborate and respond to Members as I go.
New clauses 1 and 4 relate to the creation of Skills England and its legal status. New clause 1, tabled by the hon. Member for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire (Ian Sollom), would require the Secretary of State to lay draft proposals for a new Executive agency, to be known as Skills England, within six months of Royal Assent. New clause 4, tabled by the hon. Member for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston, would require the Secretary of State to establish Skills England as a statutory body.
Our position—that we establish Skills England as an Executive agency—remains extremely clear and is entirely in keeping with the usual process for establishing arm’s length bodies. The Department is complying with the robust and vigorous process for establishing Executive agencies, which applies across Government. The Executive agency model balances operational independence with proximity to Government. That is needed to inform policy and support delivery of the Government’s mission. That model enables us to move quickly, which is vital given the scale and urgency of the skills challenges that we face.
The Government have committed to reviewing Skills England between 18 and 24 months after it is set up. That will includes an assessment of whether the Executive agency model is enabling Skills England to deliver its objectives. That is consistent with good practice. Skills will power this mission-driven Government and our plan for change. Our approach means that we can get on with the job at hand: fixing the skills system and helping more people to get the training they need to build our homes, power our towns and cities with clean energy, and master new digital technologies.
I thank the Minister for visiting the best town in England, Harlow, last week. Does she agree that this Bill will help benefit young people in my constituency and give them the skills that they need ?
I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend that the Bill will help young people to gain the skills that they need—in his wonderful constituency and in many other wonderful constituencies as well.
Amendment 6 tabled by the hon. Member for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston would frustrate the complete establishment of Skills England by delaying the transfer for a full year of the functions as set out in the Bill. Members have heard the Government set out already that delay is not an option; that has been repeatedly said. They should not just take my word for it: technology training provider QA has said that this is a pivotal moment for shaping the skills system to meet the UK’s industrial and economic needs, and it is right. The complex and fragmented nature of the skills system is contributing to critical skills gaps in our economy today: opportunities are being missed today, growth is being held back by a lack of skills today, and we cannot afford to be sluggish in our pursuit of a more joined up, data-driven approach.
In the first set of apprenticeship statistics under the new Labour Government we saw an increase in starts, participation and achievement compared with the same period under the Tories in 2023, even in the constituency of the hon. Member for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston. When the Conservatives were in government, starts in his constituency fell by 13%; almost 100 fewer people were starting apprenticeships on their watch. This Government marked National Apprenticeship Week with a set of reforms going further and faster on growth, whereas under his Government a third of vacancies were due to the lack of skills. We will press on.
The British Chambers of Commerce has urged us to work at pace to establish Skills England, and we are doing exactly that. Since being set up in shadow form, Skills England has got to work. It has got to work by identifying skills gaps in the economy and building relationships with strategic authorities, employers and other groups. Indeed, Skills England has worked with mayoral, strategic authorities and other forms of regional government as well as regional organisations to ensure that regional and national skills needs are met in line with the forthcoming industrial strategy. Skills England will work closely with the Industrial Strategy Advisory Council so that we have the skilled workforce needed to deliver a clear long-term plan for the future economy, and with the Migration Advisory Committee to ensure that growing the domestic skills pipeline reduces our reliance on overseas workers. Our constituents will not thank us for sticking in the slow lane. There is no need to wait another year, and we are ready to go now.
New clauses 2 and 3 tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) and the hon. Member for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston respectively would impose a duty on the Secretary of State to publish within one year of Royal Assent reports on the impact of the Act on T-levels and higher education. Members will be aware that we have already included in the Bill a duty for the Secretary of State to report on functions transferred from the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education that will be exercised by Skills England, including their impact on technical education and apprenticeships. This report will need to be published not after a year but after six months, which is much sooner. We have therefore already made commitments to transparency in the Bill, and that was welcomed by stakeholders, including the Association of Colleges in its written evidence to the Bill Committee. We all agree that T-levels and higher education are central to fixing our skills challenges and, as I made clear in Committee, the Skills England six-month report will include necessary information on T-levels as well as technical education and apprenticeships delivered in higher education settings. The Conservative party has argued that we must avoid Skills England being overlooked and distracted from its important work. Surely, then, we should avoid forcing it to spend its first year producing more and more reports covering the same issues.
Amendments 1 and 2 were tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central and by the hon. Member for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston respectively. These amendments would also place additional reporting requirements on the Secretary of State, this time in relation to degree apprenticeships. As with T-levels and higher education, the report that the Government have committed to providing after six months will necessarily include information on apprenticeships, including degree apprenticeships. Amendment 1 is about funding for those apprenticeships. We are setting Skills England up to build the evidence and the partnerships needed to deliver change, but policy and funding decisions on skills provisions will not sit with Skills England; they will continue to sit with the Secretary of State. That is entirely right and appropriate, and nothing in the Bill changes that. We will set out more information on level 7 apprenticeships in due course.
(3 weeks, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberI do, and my right hon. Friend gives me two valuable opportunities. The first is to pay tribute to the great Tim Leunig. We do not often talk about him in this House. He has friends here, and he is a perceptive thinker. I will look up his article.
The other opportunity that my right hon. Friend gives me is to highlight the discrepancy we can get when things appear to be getting better, when in fact they are not. That is what happened under the last Labour Government when, in spite of us falling down the international comparisons, they managed to find 11 different ways in the system to make it look like our GCSE results were improving year after year. We do not want that to happen again. There were those champions in the new Labour years who made these great reforms happen and would want to continue them now, so I say to those on the Government Benches: where are the champions today? Where are those in the modern Labour party who will say, “No, we will not be bound by ideology. We are going to do what is in the best interests of the children”? I hope there will be some of those champions in the other place.
To be fair, I was mildly encouraged this morning to hear the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, when questioned on the radio about the fate of this Bill, appearing to be somewhat open-minded, shall we say, about what might happen. To be fair, I have even been slightly encouraged listening to the Secretary of State for Education in recent days and weeks. She has sounded like she might be a little bit open to rowing back from some of the worst excesses of this legislation. There is still time. There will be weeks of this legislation being considered in the other place, so I just ask the Government to please take that time to think carefully about the legacy they will be leaving and to turn those words into deeds.
I thank the Ministers for their contributions. It is an honour to have an opportunity to speak on behalf of my constituents and my former colleagues in the teaching profession on the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Quality of teaching is the single biggest driver of standards in schools. The Bill will ensure that all teachers have or are working towards qualified teacher status. As a former teacher, I welcome that.
It is fair to say from the chuntering I have been doing from this Bench that I feel passionately about education. I find it difficult, listening to Opposition Members—I recognise that they generally care passionately about education, but sadly my experience of teaching under their Government was different from how they describe it. I once again ask the Minister to recognise that she is inheriting a workforce in the education system that is absolutely at rock bottom.
Let me stress, however—I want to make this clear to Conservative Members—that I put the wellbeing and education of children above any politics. When I talk about the education of young people, I talk not just about examinations but what is described in the teaching profession as the hidden curriculum: important life skills. Indeed, I became quite animated when a month ago, on this very spot, I spoke in a debate about the importance of financial education.
As I have said, for me a well-qualified teacher is one who still takes a joy in education that has not been sucked out of him by the endless barrage of comments in the press, and, I must add, a revolving door of Conservative Education Secretaries, although I should offer an olive branch to the right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds)—[Interruption.] I was about to say something nice about the right hon. Gentleman.
I was going to say that he was probably one of the better ones.
I should also recognise, as should we all, that the young people who are going through the education system now have been impacted negatively by something even worse than a Conservative Government, namely the terrible pandemic. We know that they are less resilient. We also know that more and more young people are having to be carers for their parents and other family members and loved ones. Members will be aware that I am very passionate about this subject, and I thank the Minister and other Members for attending and contributing to my Westminster Hall debate on it last Thursday. On average, young carers are likely to miss more school than their peers, and I welcome the proposal in the Bill to record absences to ensure that no young people fall through the gaps, including those who are home educated.
I said earlier that I did not want to be too political about this. I went through the education process and became a teacher because of Sir Tony Blair’s remark about “education, education, education”. When he said that teaching was a valuable and noble profession, I thought, “He’s right: it is.” The former Member of Parliament for Surrey Heath did not put it in quite the same way when he said that most teachers were letting young people down.
I want to say something about reform, and to move away from the ideological politics of reform. Sometimes reform is good, sometimes it is bad, and sometimes good reform is bad because of the way in which it is implemented. As a former teacher, I can assure the House that telling a student that they are not doing a very good job does not make them do a better job. When we are considering reform in education, it is hugely important that we take educationists, teachers and support staff along with us, and that, I am afraid, is something that I do not think the last Government did. I believe that the Bill returns us to the original purpose of academies: to share best practice and encourage collaboration in the best interests of children.
I was told that I must talk about the amendments and new clauses, so let me briefly speak in support of Government amendment 156, which focuses on the importance of ensuring that every school is run by a “fit and proper person”, which I think we would all agree is a no-brainer. I also want to refer to—I cannot find the right page in my speech—
At several points today, we have been transported by Conservative Members to the educational nirvana that supposedly existed under the Tory Government. That is not the memory I have, or the memory that many parents and children have. They, I think, remember the real-terms funding cuts that happened for much of the last 14 years, increasing class sizes, the millions of days lost to industrial action by unions who were fed up with the hectoring nature of previous Conservative Governments, and the 11% of children who were going hungry compared with the 8% OECD average. PISA rankings are all very well and good, but PISA scores were going down; they were just not going down as fast as those in other countries.
I thank my hon. Friend for painting a better picture than the one painted by Conservative Members.
Shortly after the election, in August, I met a couple of former teacher colleagues who were still in the profession, and they just looked broken. It was really difficult to see, because they have been maths teachers for a long period of time. When I first became a teacher, they inspired me to persevere, to reflect on the bad days and to have better lessons. To see them so fed up and so disenchanted with being a teacher was really difficult, and we have to change that. I emphasise again to the Minister that it is really important that we ensure that we support teachers’ mental health. I was going to intervene on the right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds) to ask him whether he recognises that happy and supported teachers lead to happy and supported young people, which is really important.
I will not.
I will briefly mention Government amendments 166 and 167, which talk about data protection never getting in the way of safeguarding. One of my most difficult days as a teacher—the House will be pleased to know that it has nothing to do with the Conservative Government—was when a young person in my class came to me at the end of a lesson and said those terrible words that every teacher dreads: “I need to tell you something.” Despite my explaining to her that it could not be confidential, she made a disclosure—I will not go into it, obviously—and then begged me not to tell anyone, which is not an option for teachers or anyone in a similar position. It was heartbreaking to see how upset she was, but I reported it in the correct and proper way. Clearly, safeguarding is really important, and all professionals—not just those in education—who work with young people take it very seriously. General data protection regulation, or myths about GDPR and data sharing, should not get in the way of ensuring that our young people are safe in education and outside it.
I will finish on a lighter note, because I appreciate that I have got a little bit deep. The right hon. Member for Beverley and Holderness (Graham Stuart) discussed the educational merits of having an ice cream. I say to him that 1/3πr2h is the volume of a cone.
I thank the hon. Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) for schooling me in maths—I am not very good at that.
I begin by expressing my strong support for the Bill, particularly its efforts to enhance child protection and ensure better collaboration between professionals involved in children’s care. I welcome the measures in part 2 that seek to harmonise admissions and provide cost of living support for families, especially those from deprived backgrounds.
Parents whose children are in state-funded education deserve transparency. They should have access to clear information about their child’s education and be assured that schools and trusts are operating fairly, and I look forward to measures coming forward that are not in the Bill but which will really make a difference for children, such as the child poverty strategy, the SEND review and the curriculum review. However, there is one part of this Bill that I believe needs to be amended: the level of unnecessary scrutiny that is being imposed on parents who choose to home-educate their children. Rather than protecting them, elements of the proposed register risk putting such families in danger.
Let me be clear: I support the principle of the register. As corporate parents, local authorities need to know where children are if they are not attending school. Collecting some information and the reasons for elective home education is important, not only for child protection but so that authorities can plan for the future. We know that some children who are home-educated later return to school, and many parents make this choice because local education provision does not meet their child’s needs, either temporarily or permanently. That presents an opportunity for local authorities and multi-academy trusts to work collaboratively with families to ensure that curricula and school offerings are inclusive of their needs.
However, proposed new section 436C of the Education Act 1996, which governs the content and maintenance of the home education register, contains provisions that could have serious unintended safeguarding consequences, as suggested by the hon. Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed). Under proposed new section 434A, in clause 25, the local authority must serve notice to both parents “unless exceptional circumstances apply”—for instance, in cases of domestic abuse or family estrangement. Yet proposed new section 436C, in clause 26, requires the register to include the name and home address of the child, both parents’ names and addresses, and the addresses of all places where education takes place. Crucially, there is no provision for exceptions in cases where sharing this information could put children at risk.
(4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberThe hon. Member is a tireless champion for children and young people, and he regularly writes to me even though education is a devolved matter. I will say a bit more later about the support available for children with special educational needs and disabilities. He will know that SEND is at a crisis point, and this Government are absolutely committed to reforming the system and are working at pace to do so.
New clause 20 introduces a duty for new corporate parents and local authorities in England to work collaboratively with each other when it is in the best interests of children in care and care leavers when undertaking these duties. That is to avoid siloed working or duplication of efforts, addressing the challenges that children in care and care leavers face holistically in the same way that parents do when supporting their children.
New clause 21 introduces a duty for relevant authorities to have regard to guidance issued by the Secretary of State. The guidance will set out how the duty relates to different corporate parents and how that will continue to contribute to outcomes we seek for children in care and care leavers. We will develop that guidance in partnership with the sector and with the relevant authorities listed in new schedule 1.
New clause 22 introduces a duty on the Secretary of State to report on their corporate parenting activity every three years, bringing accountability to the new duty and allowing us to monitor progress and the impact of implementation. New schedule 1 provides a power for the Secretary of State to amend the list of corporate parents by affirmative regulations. The purpose is clear: where children in care and care leavers can be further supported by the addition of new public duties as corporate parents, or where we need to make changes to existing ones, they need not wait for fresh primary legislation. We shall have the power to act swiftly and powerfully in their interests. I am sure that hon. and right hon. Members across the House share the Government’s ambition to drive a step change in the experiences and outcomes of some of the most vulnerable children and young people in society and that they will support these new clauses.
Although not explicitly mentioned in the document, young carers are obviously a group of young people who may be vulnerable and, having spoken to the Department for Education, parts of the Bill will support young carers better. Will the Minister touch on that?
Supporting young carers is a key priority for this Government. My hon. Friend is a real champion on these issues, and I am very happy to work with him to ensure that the views of young carers are heard in this place.
The Government have tabled amendments to the information sharing and consistent identifier duties in clause 4. The wider picture is that children are too often failed by inadequate or patchy information sharing, which is not good enough. The Bill enables us to make the change that children need, and the amendments will ensure that we get that right from the outset.
I want to concentrate today on our new clause 36, which would ban phones from our schools. The new clause would also write into law some of the content of the very good private Member’s Bill drafted by the hon. Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister), because this does not need to be a party political issue.
When I was on the Science and Technology Committee back in 2018, I got us to do a report on screen time, social media and children’s mental health. Back then, the evidence was already very concerning, but by now every alarm bell should be ringing. Over the last decade, there has been an explosion in mental health problems among young people all over the world, over the exact same period that smartphones and social media have become dominant in children’s lives. The growth in mental health problems is focused almost entirely on young people, not older people. Children now get smartphones at a very early age. As the Education Committee pointed out in a good report last year, one in five of the UK’s three and four-year-olds now has their own smartphone. By the end of primary school, four out of five kids have a smartphone.
There are many different ways in which smartphones and social media cause problems for children. They displace time in the real world with friends. US data, for example, shows that prior to 2012 children spent over two hours a day with friends, but that had halved by 2019. The proportion of children feeling lonely and isolated at school has exploded all over the developed world. But smartphones are not just a time sink; there is also the lack of sleep. Children are tired in school, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder has increased massively and concentration is impaired. This is a feature, not a bug. Apps are designed to be addictive and drip feed users dopamine.
At a recent school meeting that I organised in my constituency, I heard from local doctors about how excessive screen time is damaging eyesight and giving young kids the kind of back problems that one might expect from someone in late middle age. Eight out of 10 children are exposed to violent porn before the age of 18, many at a really young age. The average age at which kids see porn is now 13. The shift to a smartphone-based childhood is also leading children to be exposed to graphic violence, sextortion and self-harm encouragement, and is doing terrible things to girls’ self-image. According to the Office for National Statistics, one in five children aged 10 to 15 says they have been bullied online, and 72% of that is happening during school time.
As well as being bad in their own right, these negative effects come together to damage education. Although a ban of phones in schools cannot fix everything, it is a vital first step and can make a big difference in itself. I spoke to one headteacher who said that when they went from a policy of phones not being out to a full, “start of the day to end of the day” ban, with phones being handed in, the number of detentions they had to hand out fell by 40%, and teacher recruitment and retention improved, too.
I thank the shadow Minister for giving way; he should take this as a constructive intervention. As a former teacher, I know some of the challenges of mobile phones—the Under-Secretary of State for Education, my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham East (Janet Daby), will remember when hers went off during my speech in a debate on financial education. Will the shadow Minister also consider those groups who may require a mobile phone—I have perhaps given him a hint as to what I was going to mention—in particular young carers, who obviously need contact with family and those cared for?
The hon. Member has brilliantly anticipated a point I was going to make, and if he looks at the text of the amendment he will see it is carefully drafted exactly to allow carve-outs for those who need them, for example as health devices, so I hope he is reassured on that point.
Attempts by the tech industry to lobby, to muddy the water, to run interference and to sow confusion are unconvincing. The problems hitting our children all over the world are not just a coincidence; there is more and more evidence for a causal link. For example, Sapien Labs asked questions about adults’ mental health and combined them into a mental health quotient score. They asked the same people when they first got a smartphone and the results were stark: the earlier someone gets a phone, the worse their mental health, particularly for girls. As with smoking, a powerful social gradient is also developing with smartphones and social media. That is going to widen gaps in school achievement unless something decisive is done.
Sadly, many people still do not know about the risks from smartphones but a growing number of parents do know and are worried about the problems with smartphones and social media, but we face a collective action problem: we worry that our kids will miss out if they are the only ones without them, and that is the problem that needs solving and Government need to be part of that. Across this country there has been an explosion of parent-powered campaign groups aiming to fight back including Smartphone Free Childhood, Safe Screens, Delay Smartphones and the new “Rage Against the Screen” campaign. Over the last year they have gained hundreds of thousands of members and together with the shadow Secretary of State and the Leader of the Opposition we met some of them this morning and I pay tribute to them for their work.
(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberI 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.
(1 month 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 educational opportunities for young carers.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Furniss. I am pleased to see so many hon. Members from across the House here today, and I thank them for attending. I know that some have personal stories to tell, and I look forward to hearing them.
As many hon. Members will be aware, yesterday was Young Carers Action Day. We have held a number of events in Parliament with the support of the Carers Trust. This week, young carers visited No. 10 and wrote directly to the Prime Minister to ask for his support in ensuring that young carers and young adult carers are the golden thread that goes through everything his Government do. Students from Mark Hall academy in Harlow visited Parliament, and the hon. Member for Mid Sussex (Alison Bennett) and I took part in an open-top bus trip around London, which went very well until we were unfortunately attacked by hail.
A recent report by the Carers Trust has identified a number of issues that young carers face in educational settings:
“Caring has a significant negative impact on education…Awareness, identification and recording of young carers in educational settings is still too low…Support for young carers in education is worryingly inconsistent.”
Here are a few statistics: almost half of young carers—48%—reported being bullied in the past year; more than two in five—44%—frequently struggle to study for tests or exams because of the demands of their caring situation; and almost a third of young carers are regularly late for school because of those demands. Almost one in four young carers say there is no support at all for young carers in their school, college or university.
It is estimated that there are around 2,000 young carers in Staffordshire, many of whom are hesitant to come forward for fear of disrupting their home lives. For those flying under the radar, it is even harder to get proper support. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Department for Education’s commitment to creating a more comprehensive register of young people will ensure that resources can be distributed more effectively, so that problem areas can be identified?
I thank my hon. Friend for her useful and thoughtful intervention. She is absolutely right. One of the biggest issues for young carers is identifying them. First, young carers do not recognise themselves as being young carers. Secondly, as she rightly says, some young carers are worried about coming forward, as they feel that identifying themselves as young carers would somehow make it seem as though their parents are failing them, which is absolutely not the case.
I welcome the DFE’s commitment to better identifying young carers—it is great that young carers are now part of the school census—but we have to recognise that there is much more to do. In the most recent school census, 72% of schools said that they do not have any young carers, which cannot be right. Although we have made strides in this area, there is obviously much more we need to do. I look forward to the Minister’s comments on that.
As many hon. Members will be aware, since I mention it in most of my speeches, I spent the first 15 years of my working life as a secondary school maths teacher, teaching in various schools across Essex and working with students aged 11 to 18 with a variety of abilities. I have recalled to the House many times one parents’ evening in which a student of mine arrived with both his parents, who were severely physically disabled. To my shame—this is something I have carried with me— I had no idea, until that point, that he and his older sister were young carers.
Since then, I have worked to ensure that I am more knowledgeable about young carers and young adult carers. Before my election in July, I worked for a wonderful charity in Harlow and Essex called Action for Family Carers. It provides respite care and in-school support for children and young people who care for family members and loved ones with physical and mental disabilities.
Young carers and young adult carers play a hugely important role for their families and their communities, giving to the NHS in an invaluable way. We must recognise their impact in saving money for the NHS and in helping the economy, but too often, they do not get the recognition they deserve. There is an urgent need for better identification of young carers in the education system, as many do not even realise that they are young carers until it has already impacted their lives, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Leigh Ingham) said. For them, it is just normal—caring for a family member or a loved one.
I have visited several schools in my Harlow constituency that do a great job of supporting young carers, and I pay special tribute to Mark Hall academy, which allowed me to meet and talk to its young carers club. I also pay tribute to Purford Green and Holy Cross primary schools for their great work in identifying young carers, and to the many other schools across Essex where I have previously worked.
Some, but not all, schools do great work to identify young carers and have a designated young carers lead. It is vital that all teachers have knowledge of young carers and young adult carers, so my first ask of the Minister is to make training on young carers a mandatory part of teacher training.
It is important that schools have a designated young carers lead. Having spoken to young carers in my previous job and as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for young carers and young adult carers, I know how much anxiety is caused by having to tell at least five different teachers why they are late or have not done their homework. One young carer recently told me that he feels embarrassed to tell people, and that he has to ask peers to keep the noise down in the school library because, for him, it is the only quiet place where he can get his studies done. He does not have that option at home.
The hon. Member makes a valid and important point about schools having a young carers lead, and I am proud to say that every school in Gloucestershire has one. My constituent Christian, who I met yesterday, has been caring for his grandmother from the age of six, but it was not until he was 11 that he was identified by his school as a young carer. Does the hon. Member therefore agree that, although it is an excellent endeavour to have more leads, more still needs to be done?
As soon as the hon. Member mentioned Gloucestershire, I thought of the fantastic young carers from Gloucestershire I met yesterday. He is right that having a young carers lead is useful where a school has identified a student as a young carer, but we need to do more to identify young carers in the first place. I was previously a teacher, and teachers have a key role in identifying young carers.
There is also a lack of structured support in schools, particularly during the transitions from primary to secondary or from secondary to further education. One of our young carers told the APPG about his experience of applying to university, and how the university website did not provide any case studies that were relevant to him.
When we talk about transitions, we are not just talking about moving through stages of education; we are talking about how the caring role can change—often, sadly, for the worse. It is the responsibility of people in positions of authority to recognise that and to act. As a former teacher, I know only too well how easily young people can slip through the cracks. I am committed to changing that, which is why we need targeted training for educators to better identify young carers and to equip them with the tools to make their lives more manageable.
Other professionals can help, too. Action for Family Carers, for example, ran a project to reach out to GPs. It seems nonsensical that when a parent visits a doctor’s surgery with an acute medical condition, the question of their children’s caring responsibility is not even broached.
To support young carers, there should be a dedicated point of contact in education—a trusted person in authority who students can approach to discuss any caring responsibilities that might affect their studies. Whether it is about missing a deadline or arriving late to class, having one person to communicate with would ensure that the right people are informed and the student’s needs are met. This simple addition could make a world of difference, and there are some great examples of schools that do just that, but it is not universal. There should be mandatory training for teachers, so that they can all help with the task of identifying young carers.
Finally, transition periods, especially from primary to secondary school and on to college or university, are tough enough for everyone but even more so for young carers without support. As young carers highlighted to the all-party group, the leap to university feels unattainable due to the lack of provision. We know that a number of young carers do not go to university because they are concerned about leaving those they care for behind, and when they do go, they choose universities that are close to home, which potentially limits their options.
Education should provide hope and opportunity for all, regardless of background or circumstance. Resources must be in place for those facing disadvantage, ensuring that those challenges do not become insurmountable barriers. It is important that young carers have the opportunity to be children as well.
I thought I had two hours! I thank you, Ms Furniss, and all hon. Members who have contributed to the debate. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis) for a trademark passionate and powerful speech about his family, as well as the wider role of young carers. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) for paying tribute to the young carers services in her constituency. I thank my hon. Friends the Members for Stafford (Leigh Ingham) and for Redditch (Chris Bloore) for their contributions, and the hon. Member for Tewkesbury (Cameron Thomas) for his learned contribution as well.
I thank the Lib Dem spokesperson, the hon. Member for Mid Sussex (Alison Bennett); the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for East Wiltshire (Danny Kruger); and the Minister for contributing to this important debate. I know from experience that what the Minister says is true: where there is greater poverty, there is greater need. We are seeing more and more young carers supporting a loved one with mental health issues.
We need more accurate data to understand the scale of the challenge. We also need to recognise that young carers have different caring responsibilities and often care for different people. They also often have needs themselves. I welcome the Minister’s statement about making knowledge about young carers part of teacher training.
When we speak to young carers, we cannot help but be struck by how thoughtful, articulate and caring they are. I apologise to anyone who had an ambition to become a tax lawyer or a bank manager, but when I speak to young adult carers about their futures, they often tell me that they want to be nurses, care assistants, doctors and teachers. I even met one yesterday who said that she wanted to be a politician. Sadly, however, we too often meet young carers who do not have any ambition, because all they can think about is caring for their loved one—that is something we need to take very seriously.
I will briefly mention the young carers covenant—otherwise the Carers Trust will tell me off—which identifies some of what I have asked for today. I also emphasise the importance of recognising the difference between young carers and care leavers; it is amazing how many people do not understand that distinction. Finally, I ask every hon. Member to keep talking about young carers in Parliament. Young Carers Action Day may happen only once a year, but our young carers do this work every single day.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered educational opportunities for young carers.
(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberWe recognise the challenges in the area that the hon. Gentleman represents. A SEND improvement board chaired independently by Dame Christine Lenehan oversees progress and provides challenge. We know that the system needs wholesale reform; we are working at pace and will make an announcement as soon as possible.
My hon. Friend is right to mention young carers. The Government are committed to increasing their visibility and ensuring that they have the support that they need, at home and in education. We champion initiatives such as Young Carers Action Day and the young carers covenant, which further highlights the needs of young carers and the support available to them.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI thank the hon. Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew) and my hon. Friend the Member for Filton and Bradley Stoke (Claire Hazelgrove) for securing this debate. I can tell my hon. Friend the Member for York Outer (Mr Charters) that a 20p coin is heptagonal.
I support the need for further financial education in schools, but as Members may have sensed from my poker face earlier, I have a few caveats. Please take them as constructive, rather than destructive.
Having worked for a homelessness charity, I know that people cannot budget their way out of poverty, but this conversation is not just about budgeting. It is about the wider views and ideas on financial education. Members on both sides of the House have recognised the power of teaching young people about some of these pitfalls and scams, such as the impact of turning to payday loan sharks when times are tough. It is not about telling young people how they have to live their lives or what they have to do, but about providing awareness of the dangers that they face.
As many hon. Members will know, because I mention it in almost every speech I give, I used to be a teacher. I was a secondary school maths teacher for 15 years, teaching young people from year 7 to year 13, including teaching A-level maths and further maths, so I taught maths up to degree level. I absolutely love trigonometry. Wait until you get to further maths trigonometry, and sine and cosine rules, Madam Deputy Speaker—I can tell you, it is brilliant. I also specialise in statistics, strangely enough, despite my engineering degree. There is a misapprehension that the ability to teach maths equates—excuse the pun—to an ability to teach finance. If we were having the ordinary to and fro that we normally see in the Chamber, I would defend myself by pointing out that I can read a book, but I cannot teach English literature. Finance and maths both include numbers, but history and English both include words and they are different subjects.
When I chat to my Conservative friend—he is the reason I am in this place—we have very animated discussions about education. I once said to him, “What do you think is the most important skill for a teacher?” He said, “Well, discipline, and the ability to get marking done on time.” He came up with a whole list of things, but I said to him, “The one thing you have not mentioned is the ability to explain things clearly—surely that is the most important skill for a teacher.” I could teach the hon. Member for Broadland and Fakenham how to do compound interest, which comes up on the maths curriculum, but if I were asked to teach him how pensions work, I would struggle. That means not that I do not know how pensions work, but that I have not been taught the skills to teach that to somebody else. People do not naturally have the ability to explain things; they have to be trained in that skill.
I hope what I am saying, in a roundabout way, is seen as constructive, not critical. If we believe in financial education—[Interruption.] It is just like being back at school—put the phone in the box, Minister. You don’t have to really—[Laughter.] If we believe that teaching financial education is important in schools, then it has to be taught properly. The hon. Member for Broadland and Fakenham correctly said that measures were brought through this place over 10 years ago, but the subject is not truly being taught in schools in the way that we would like it to be. I would like it to be a distinct, bespoke subject. At worst, it could be a module taught as part of a subject like business studies or economics—my wife is an economics teacher, so she will love me for that suggestion—rather than adding to the already extensive maths curriculum. I do not think it would be feasible to add financial education to the maths curriculum or that that would have the outcome that the House wants to see.
The hon. Member for Broadland and Fakenham talked about the importance of financial education being measurable, and I could not agree more. One of my biggest frustrations as a maths teacher—have I got time, Madam Deputy Speaker? I will not go on a big story—was when a student would say to me, “Is this going to be in the exam?” That was frustrating because I genuinely love maths. I wanted to teach people that a2+b2=c2, not because it was going to come up in the exam but because it is truly interesting.
I can see the hon. Gentleman was a model student.
We have to recognise the way the school system currently works. If young people think there will not be an exam on a subject, they do not think that subject is measurable. Equally, if teachers do not see that something is going to be measurable in an Ofsted inspection, it will be moved down the list of priorities. We have to recognise that a lot of teachers have a lot on their plates. If we want financial education to be on the top of the plate—the cherry on the top, perhaps—we need to ensure that it is measurable, accountable and taken seriously. I do not believe that bolting financial education on to the maths curriculum will make that happen; I would much prefer it to be a bespoke subject. I have rambled on enough but hopefully I have made my point.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberOur Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill is a whole package of measures that will not only deliver landmark reforms to child safeguarding, but unleash the ability of all schools to collaborate and work together in operating under this new accountability system to drive high and rising standards. This will ensure that every child has the offer of a national curriculum, a qualified teacher in every classroom, and high and rising standards in every school in England.
I thank the Minister for her statement, particularly considering the awful news she had to convey to this House. As a former teacher, I saw at first hand the damage that high-stakes single-word Ofsted judgments had on teachers and headteachers not just in my constituency of Harlow, but across Essex. I welcome this Government’s focus on raising standards in our schools, but does she recognise that under the previous Government there was far too much focus on stick rather than carrot when it came to supporting teachers? Any change to the Ofsted framework needs to support our hard-working teachers, whose mental health and wellbeing are rock bottom at the moment.
I thank my hon. Friend for that question, and I commend him for his experience in the classroom, which is clearly valuable. We always want to encourage more teachers. Indeed, the whole reasoning behind these reforms is to create an accountability system that recognises good practice and identifies where improvements can be made, but also diagnoses how such improvements can be made and ensures there is the ability to create a self-improving system among our schools, so that they can support one another to drive forward those improvements in the interests of everybody. It is not about punishing schools; it is about supporting schools to create those improvements, which we know that they want and we want to see for children.