Home-to-School Transport

Georgia Gould Excerpts

Thursday 4th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg. I thank all Members for an incredibly constructive and thoughtful discussion. It was particularly powerful that so many Members brought the lived experience of their constituents and some of the challenges that they face with home-to-school transport to the Chamber. I welcome the visibility given to those stories.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon) on securing this important debate. His passion for and commitment to this subject came across in his speech, as did the fact that he has been an avid campaigner who has widely engaged with families. We have heard today why this is such an important issue.

We also heard why the support that is available through home-to-school transport matters to families. It is the mechanism through which many disadvantaged families, many children in rural communities and many young people with SEND are able to access education. We heard how the existing statutory rights are incredibly important.

In addition, we heard about the particular challenges faced by rural communities, where the distances are greater and home-to-school transport costs are higher. That is why the Government made changes as part of a fair funding review, which included a distinct home-to-school transport relative needs formula, based on pupil numbers and home-to-school distances. The focus on distance deliberately supports those authorities with the longest distances and recognises the needs of rural communities.

We heard about the statutory guidance and about the discretionary opportunities available to local authorities. Local authorities have a discretionary power to arrange free travel for children who do not meet the eligibility criteria, in recognition of specific local factors. We have heard about some of the challenges that areas face, and local authorities are best placed to make those decisions.

We heard from the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough about the importance of data, and about the data that the Department holds, in holding local authorities to account. We have added a new absence code to reflect issues with local authority-arranged transport. Since September 2025, local authorities have been able to evaluate absences that are the result of home-to-school transport. Just 0.011% of the total number of school sessions that are missed is due to such transport; for special schools, the percentage is higher. That is really important data. Of course, any missed school session is one too many. Data helps with accountability, but I understand that the hon. Gentleman was referencing wider data and I would be very happy to have a follow-up conversation about that.

We also heard from many other Members about the interaction between SEND and disabilities, and about the increase that we have seen in the need for home-to-school transport for children and young people with SEND. As I have engaged with children around the country, that is something that I have heard time and again. Sometimes, children have to spend up to two hours on transport to access education. For some children who sometimes have issues regulating and who can find change disruptive, as well as for their families, that can be an incredibly distressing experience, despite the best efforts of the providers.

This also disconnects children from their communities. I always remember speaking to an 18-year-old who travelled a long distance to school every day. He said that when he returned to his community, he did not have friends or networks within it, so he felt very isolated going into adulthood. It is therefore incredibly important that children have access to SEND provision locally and closer to home, and Members today have agreed with that. Improving home-to-school transport is core to the SEND reforms.

The hon. Member for Windsor (Jack Rankin), who spoke for the Opposition, rightly challenged me on how we can move as quickly as possible to deliver such improvement. As he knows, we are investing £3.7 billion into 60,000 new places. That investment has gone in last year and this year, so it is going into communities urgently to help them to address those challenges.

We are supporting a large number of free schools to go forward. As we have heard, some local authorities have chosen to use their share of that investment to move faster in providing new places, at a cost of around £50,000 per place. The development of new places is critical, but it is also critical to make schools more inclusive for students—everything from improving school buildings and teaching—to develop the expertise around schools, so that local schools are accessible for children with SEND and every area has the right specialist provision available.

This investment will transform children’s outcomes; it not only reduces travel time but, as we have heard, saves money, which is also important. And the money that is saved can go back into improving outcomes for children in some of the really critical issues that have been raised during this debate.

We also heard a number of Members talk about support for young people post 16. There was a particularly powerful speech from my hon. Friend the Member for Sittingbourne and Sheppey (Kevin McKenna) on the topic.

At the moment, local authorities have a statutory duty to make sure no young person is prevented from attending education post 16 because of a lack of transport. Local authorities must publish annual transport statements on this, and it is expected that local authorities will make reasonable decisions. Many local authorities do subsidise transport for young people post 16, but I have very much heard the passionate responses in the Chamber today. The issue also came up in the SEND consultation that we recently completed. We will look carefully at those responses.

As the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Windsor, said, the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde) made a powerful speech about an incredibly distressing story from his constituency. I will of course meet him and Lewis’s family to discuss it and look at what we can do to make changes in the future. I thank him for raising that—I am sorry that they got caught in that transition.

The hon. Member for Woking (Mr Forster) also raised issues about safeguarding and an appalling tragedy that happened in his constituency. He will know that some of the measures in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 were very much a response to the lessons learned from that horrendous case, but again I am very happy to meet him to discuss this further.

More widely on the national criteria and the statutory guidance, we heard a powerful speech from my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft), who is a brilliant campaigner on these issues. I want to reassure her that there is no intention to look at means testing. We absolutely reject some of the calls we have heard from, for example, the Reform leader of Warwickshire county council to try to reduce those statutory distances. We are not in the business of reducing disabled children’s rights to transport.

In conclusion, this has been a thoughtful and important debate. A number of issues have been raised that we must continue to look at. I hope we can follow up on conversations in relation to not only special educational needs and disabilities but the wider system and our shared ambition, which have been highlighted in this debate, to ensure that people have access to opportunity and education.

Children: Development of Essential Skills

Georgia Gould Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd June 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I welcome today’s constructive and thoughtful debate and the constructive tone of both the hon. Members for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire (Ian Sollom) and for Meriden and Solihull East (Saqib Bhatti). I know we all share a desire to ensure that our children are supported to grow up into well-rounded adults. It is brilliant to see young people in the Gallery listening to the debate.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) for securing this debate. He has been such a champion of these issues, and almost on a daily, or at least weekly, basis he stops me to discuss these questions. As he said, I have visited his constituency and seen some of the work that he is leading in practice. As we have heard today, these are massively important topics. The Milburn review has shown the real cost of unemployment for young people and how critical it is to ensure that they have the skills that can support them into the workplace, but also, as we have heard from so many people, support them to be active citizens participating in community life.

I will start where my hon. Friend did in his speech and focus on the importance of children and young people feeling confident to face challenges and shape the world around them. So much change is happening, and we cannot fully imagine the world that young people will go out into. It is therefore critical that they have the core foundations of knowledge as well as a love of learning. We want young people to return to and enjoy learning as their time in the workplace goes on; learning should be core throughout their lives. They must feel that they have the skills to be able to deal with uncertainty, to shape the world and to feel confident. So many young people tell me that that is not how they feel at the moment. That is why the curriculum and assessment review and this debate are so important.

The hon. Member for Meriden and Solihull East asked whether we have to choose between knowledge and skills and standards and inclusion. For me, they are two sides of the same coin. It is absolutely critical that we support our children to attain academically. We all know that too many young people are being left behind, and we have stark gaps for disadvantaged young people that we need to address. A big part of that is how they are engaged in education. School has to be unmissable, and as my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell said, the joy of learning is critical. It is important that children are engaged and want to come to school to develop their knowledge, whether that is through enrichment or through teaching the core things that they really want to know about, such as financial education.

In this Chamber and the main Chamber, we often talk about inclusion and the importance of supporting children with special educational needs and disabilities to feel a sense of wellbeing and belonging. Too often, they have not felt that, and that has left them feeling disengaged from education. We will pursue both knowledge and skills and inclusion and high standards for our young people.

We have heard throughout the debate about the curriculum and assessment review and the work that we commissioned Professor Becky Francis to do with an incredibly expert panel. It did a really careful and thoughtful piece of work for the Government, setting out the things that it felt needed to change to support children to be able to go out confidently into the modern world. Lots of the themes that came up in this debate—media literacy, digital literacy, the importance of citizenship, oracy—came out in the review, and we have committed to embedding them. In terms of next steps, a huge amount of work is going on to draft programmes of study and to test them with a range of different partners. We have committed to giving schools four terms to prepare for implementing the new curriculum.

The hon. Member for Meriden and Solihull East asked about space in the curriculum. What was really powerful about the work that Dr Becky Francis led was that it gave careful thought to the sequencing of the curriculum, how things fit together and how duplication can be prevented. We are developing a digital curriculum for the first time, so it will be much easier for teachers to make links between different subjects.

The hon. Member for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell) and my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell also raised enrichment and its importance in making school unmissable and making young people excited about coming to school. I travel around the country talking to young people, and they often say that it is the thing they really look forward to and that it helps them to feel part of the wider school community. We will publish an enrichment framework with a focus on developing wider life skills relating to arts and culture, civic engagement, nature, outdoor adventure, and sport and physical activities.

Many Members made really important points about making sure that the enrichment offer is open to students who feel further away from those opportunities, and we are working with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport to build up the enrichment offer in 400 schools in the most disadvantaged areas. We are investing £22.5 million from the dormant assets fund to make that a reality, as well as working with a whole range of partners to ensure that the enrichment framework for all schools is a really powerful tool.

Another point raised by a number of Members was about citizenship and political education. My hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel) made a really powerful speech about how important that is for votes at 16, but also for our democratic institutions and our ability to disagree agreeably and have these political debates. When we have so much misinformation and division, embedding that in our education system is incredibly important. We have committed to citizenship being statutory in key stages 1 and 2, and to strengthening and modernising citizenship across the curriculum, looking at many of the themes that we have talked about, including media literacy.

The hon. Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) talked about digital literacy and AI and about making sure that those are core skills. We are looking to embed key areas such as digital and media literacy across the curriculum, because every single subject will have an element of these AI and digital skills, but we are also refreshing the computing GCSE so that particular content is focused on that.

On media literacy, the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) mentioned misinformation. That is another really important theme that will sit in citizenship but also in other subjects. In history, for instance, people will really think about sources and how to decipher information, and in English people will look at emotive language. Those are areas where we can look at these core themes embedded into the wider curriculum.

My hon. Friend the Member for Filton and Bradley Stoke (Claire Hazelgrove) and others mentioned financial literacy, which comes up more than anything else from young people as being a skill that they really want to have and learn about. We are working across the maths curriculum and the wider piece to look at how we really embed financial literacy, and we will be doing a number of test and learns around implementation and working with teachers.

Turning to the different contributions on early years childcare, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton North East (Kirith Entwistle). She made an incredibly powerful speech about what a lifeline childcare is for families, and I completely agree. I see that all the time as a constituency MP, and particularly how essential it is for mums, who often end up doing so much of that childcare. My hon. Friend mentioned the importance of the 30 hours of free childcare; that has made a difference for people taking up the full entitlement, which we think has saved them an average of £8,000. She also mentioned how fees and different practices can pull away at some of that really important cost of living support. The Secretary of State for Education has written to the Competition and Markets Authority to request a review of the early years childcare market, which is to look precisely at many of the issues that my hon. Friend mentioned. It is worth having a look at that letter, and it is a really important issue to pursue.

The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) talked about the importance of early years, and my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon) spoke powerfully about the long-term impact of delayed language development for children. Sadly, since the pandemic we have seen many more children coming into school with delayed language. We know the long-term impact on children, so that has been a key focus for the Government in developing Best Start hubs, which will give that wraparound support to children, but also introducing new programmes such as the early language support programme, which brings NHS services to schools to identify needs earlier, and the Nuffield early learning intervention programme, which puts support in for reception children. I would be interested to hear more about what is going on in Cornwall and some of the challenges that my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth mentioned, and to discuss that further. This is also a key part of our thinking around the SEND reforms, putting more investment, earlier, into speech and language support and the new Experts at Hand service, which will include speech and language therapists.

[Jim Shannon]

First, may I welcome the Minister’s comments on all the issues that have been raised, particularly mine on screen time? Sometimes we must engage with parents in a way that shows that we understand that children should be given a bit of time on their iPads but that that time should be restricted, too. Does the Minister have any thoughts on that?

[Georgia Gould]

I thank the hon. Member for raising that issue. We have developed guidance for parents to support them with screen time in early years. As a parent of a two-and-a-half-year-old, I know how confusing it can be. It is not something that I was spoken to about when I had my son. It is important we have guidance that is not judgmental but gives parents the best advice. We have put that out now. A lot of expertise has gone into developing it and I have had really positive feedback. Certainly, I have found it very helpful personally in shaping those important decisions. It is also important that through our Best Start hubs we are able to have that conversation and support for children, not just about not being on screens, but about what engagement looks like: what are the activities, how does one encourage a child to speak, and as they get older what are the enrichment activities that they can engage in after the school day?

The hon. Member for Yeovil is always a passionate advocate of support for children with special educational needs and disabilities, and I welcome him mentioning that as part of these wider issues. On the questions on identifying needs, he will know that we are developing national inclusion standards which include research into identification around the needs we have set out in our SEND consultation document. That work is ongoing and it will form part of national inclusion standards. We are working on appointing the panel of independent experts at the moment. It is critical that we get that right, and have that early identification of needs, whether on speech and language or others.

The hon. Gentleman also mentioned the importance of support for young people who are constantly having to re-sit English and maths. He will know we have been consulting on a new level 1 English and maths qualification, which is precisely designed to support children and young people to consolidate their knowledge and be a gateway qualification to deal with exactly that problem, which is one I have heard time and time again.

[Adam Dance]

I thank the Minister for giving way and for answering all my questions, as always. Concerned parents in Yeovil also tell me that kids who have autism, obsessive compulsive disorder, sensory issues or attention deficit disorder cannot find apprenticeships or work, nor have they had help developing the skills they need to get into the creative or agricultural sector. Can the Minister set out what more the Government are doing to support rural schools and employers to get neurodiverse people into those industries?

[Georgia Gould]

I really appreciate that question. Again, talking to families and young people around the country, that comes up all the time. I welcomed the Milburn review’s focus on the experience of young people with SEND and disabilities, and on some of those barriers. There is action we are already taking, through supported internships and our work with further education, but it is an area in which we need to go further. It is something we are continuing to work on with the Department for Work and Pensions. I am happy to have further conversations about those issues.

I want to conclude by thanking everyone for this really important debate. These are areas we are actively looking at as we develop the new curriculum and think about developing the oracy framework we have committed to. Employers have said to us that it is essential young people have the skills they need for later life. Many of us will have seen how powerful some of these interventions are. I was recently with the Duke of Edinburgh, talking to young people in a school in my constituency. They talked about the confidence and problem-solving skills that the programme gave them, changing their sense of what was possible for them. That sits alongside the core knowledge that young people must learn, supporting young adults to be well rounded and able to shape their futures confidently. I hope that we can continue these conversations, as a lot of important ideas were mentioned today. We will consult fully on the new curriculum, which I am sure that all Members will look at with interest.

Oral Answers to Questions

Georgia Gould Excerpts

Monday 20th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jodie Gosling (Nuneaton) (Lab)]

5. What assessment she has made of the effectiveness of supported internships.

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

Last week we announced an expansion of our supported internships offer to unlock opportunities for more young people with special educational needs and disabilities, so that they can benefit from a seamless transition into the world of work. I have spoken to young people and teachers and heard how transformative supported internships can be for confidence and in supporting children to take those steps into work, and we are determined to get behind the talent of children with SEND.

[Jodie Gosling]

I thank the Secretary of State for her commitment to supporting supported interns and for the announcement of £9 million for non-EHCP—education, health and care plan—pilots. Almost 80% of our brilliant supported interns in Nuneaton go on into paid employment, well above the national average of 5% of young people with learning difficulties. Will the Secretary of State please give us more information about what support will be available to enable our colleges to deliver in line with the SEND White Paper? Also, will she join me at either our brilliant Queen Elizabeth award-winning North Warwickshire and South Leicestershire college, or at George Eliot hospital to see the real impact of supported interns and celebrate their achievements?

[Georgia Gould]

I am incredibly grateful for the work of my hon. Friend in championing children with special educational needs and disabilities, both before and during her time as a Member of Parliament, and thank her for bringing her expertise to this discussion. I would be delighted to visit and see some of the work of supported internships in practice. As I have set out, we have invested £9 million and are continuing to work with colleges to support inclusion, as well as support into employment.

[Liz Jarvis (Eastleigh) (LD)]

I have been contacted by a mum in my constituency who is trying to find a supported internship for her son, who has an EHCP. Even with the “Find an apprenticeship” service, parents are left having to research and find suitable options themselves. What further action will the Minister take to ensure young people with SEND are not disadvantaged in accessing supported internships?

[Georgia Gould]

I welcome the hon. Lady’s question. We want to make it much easier for children with special educational needs and disabilities to find support and access opportunities, and are working closely with colleges to do that. As part of our reforms, we will be delivering new national inclusion standards that set out our expectations, and as I have said, we are investing in broadening supported internships.

[Lloyd Hatton (South Dorset) (Lab)]

6. What steps her Department is taking to fund sports facilities in secondary schools in South Dorset constituency.

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

The Government are opening up access to music, art, drama and—crucially—sport. We want schools to have access to high-quality sports facilities so that children can achieve and thrive. The Department is improving school facilities through guidance and rebuilding programmes, with £2.1 billion of capital funding.

[Lloyd Hatton]

Budmouth academy has received a record multimillion-pound investment from this Labour Government to rebuild many of the school’s buildings. However, its crumbling outdoor courts—which are home to the South and West Dorset netball league—are currently not included in the rebuild. More than 300 women and girls are part of that league, and of course the courts are also used by students all year round. We desperately want to rebuild the courts, so can the Minister work with us to explore how those courts can be included in the scope of the rebuild?

[Georgia Gould]

I would like to start by acknowledging the proactive response of the brilliant team at Budmouth academy in response to a recent meningitis case, and I am really pleased to hear how welcome the investment in the school rebuilding programme is at that academy. On top of that investment, the Aspirations Academies Trust has been provisionally allocated investment of over £1.9 million to improve its estates. I would welcome the opportunity to meet my hon. Friend to discuss this matter further.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

I hope that schools in South Dorset and—crucially—the Minister will have read the Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport’s “Game On” report, which was published today. It makes the case for increased physical activity in schools and the positive impact it has on a pupil’s ability to learn. However, recent reports suggest that the Government are proposing funding cuts for physical education, so will the Minister please give a very clear commitment today that there will be no reduction in funding for PE in our schools? In fact, I would love to hear from her that there will actually be increased investment in our children’s health, wellbeing and learning through a more active school day.

[Georgia Gould]

The Government absolutely want to see children engaged in physical activity, and to support that through the school day. We have recently announced funding for school games organisers and will be setting out further information about our new partnership model, which will bring together different partners from across the private, public and voluntary sectors to ensure that children in every community have opportunities.

[Fleur Anderson (Putney) (Lab)]

7. What plans she has to review school food standards requiring mandatory servings of meat, fish and dairy.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

This Government believe that a collaborative school system is the best way to drive high and rising standards, so that every child can achieve and thrive. In our schools White Paper, we have set out how we plan to support further collaboration while improving accountability to deliver the education our children deserve.

[Alison Bennett]

There are three schools in my Mid Sussex constituency that were part of the University of Brighton academy trust. Given that serious concerns about financial management at UBAT persisted for years before re-brokerage was triggered, will reforms to the multi-academy trust governance system include early warning systems, so that failing trusts are identified and intervention takes place before reaching the point of failure?

[Georgia Gould]

I really welcome the hon. Lady’s question. I absolutely agree that we need to spot the early warning signs of financial failure. That is why we are bringing in a new Ofsted inspection framework for multi-academy trusts that will look at other issues, including governance and financial management.

[Harriet Cross (Gordon and Buchan) (Con)]

16. What recent progress her Department has made on implementing the complaints scheme provided for in the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023.

--- Later in debate ---

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

T8. As the MP for Sandhurst, I am proud to represent many armed forces families. As the Minister will know, armed forces families often move around, but no particular support seems to be given to their children. There is no marker to identify these children, they do not qualify for fair access protocols, and they are given no particular priority in admissions. Will she meet me to discuss how we can better support the children of armed forces families?

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

We are deeply grateful for the service of our armed forces families. I would welcome the opportunity to meet my hon. Friend, and I recently met members of the all-party parliamentary group on the armed forces. We will be bringing forward further admissions reforms shortly.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

--- Later in debate ---

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

Some 4% of children are diagnosed with foetal alcohol spectrum disorder. It is totally avoidable, yet it can impact on movement, communication, thinking, concentration and many physiological changes, placing significant demands on the SEND system. Will the Education Secretary work with the Health Secretary to deliver a 1,001 critical days strategy, preventing FASD and rising demand on the SEND system?

[Georgia Gould]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that critical issue. It is an area on which we are already working closely with health colleagues, both in our support for families but also in response to children’s SEND needs. We have a meeting later, where we will discuss the matter.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

T2. There are some brilliant specialist SEND schools in my constituency, such as Muntham House and Aurora Vincent House. In the White Paper, there is currently no clear definition of a specialist school, and concerns remain that provision is being framed as something to be reduced, rather than planned for. What role does the Department see special schools having in the reformed system, and how will they be funded?

[Georgia Gould]

We agree that special schools play an incredibly important role in the system by providing vital care for children with complex needs and supporting their wider education. They have an important role in the schools White Paper with regard both to education support and to the outreach they do for mainstream schools. We are proposing the introduction of specialist provision packages precisely in order to end the postcode lottery and create more clarity over what specialist provision should look like.

[Florence Eshalomi (Vauxhall and Camberwell Green) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank the Secretary of State for visiting St Paul’s primary school in my constituency a few weeks ago to meet the excellent head, Angela Batchelor, and her staff team, where we heard at first hand from parents the importance of the wraparound nursery service and the additional breakfast club. One of the issues raised was SEND, which I know the Secretary of State is really looking at. Can she outline when we will see those changes coming through in order to help the families who are struggling with accessing SEND services from their local authority?

--- Later in debate ---

[Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)]

T4. Eastbourne headteachers have expressed grave concerns about the impact of the new Ofsted framework on staff wellbeing, and its punishing impact on schools in deprived areas. Will the Minister meet me and Eastbourne headteachers for a roundtable to discuss how we can avoid disastrous consequences happening again?

[Georgia Gould]

I would be very happy to meet the hon. Member. The new framework has been designed to support the wellbeing of heads and to give a clear and full view of school performance, but I am happy to continue that conversation.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)]

I welcome the Experts at Hand service and the £3.7 million that has been given to Cornwall to set it up. We struggle, however, to get occupational therapists, educational psychologists and speech and language therapists in rural and coastal areas. What incentives are there, and what is the Minister doing, to encourage people to come down to Cornwall and work in our services?

[Georgia Gould]

We were delighted to announce £429 million for new speech and language therapists, occupational therapists and educational psychologists, which will go to communities around the country. We are working closely with colleagues in Health to ensure that there are no cold spots and that every single school and child has access to that essential support.

SEND Provision and Reform

Georgia Gould Excerpts

Monday 13th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

I am grateful for the huge interest across the Chamber in this critically important issue. Tonight, we heard from so many different Members of Parliament the voices of children and families; I thank MPs for the efforts they have made to listen to those children and families, and to bring their voices to me personally and into the Chamber. I appreciate the hon. Member for Farnham and Bordon (Gregory Stafford) for bringing this important debate to the House and for his long-standing support for children with special educational needs and disabilities. I think we have all heard the depth and strength of concern, and the agreement that at the moment, the system is broken and not working for so many families.

[Chris Hinchliff (North East Hertfordshire) (Lab)]

Will the Minister give way?

[Georgia Gould]

I do not have much time, so I am not going to take interventions. I want to be able to answer the points that have been put to me.

Too many children have been left without provision, and parents try to explain to their children why they are not at school alongside their friends. Too many parents are having to battle—we have heard the word “fight” time and time again in this conversation. I say to the hon. Member for Meriden and Solihull East (Saqib Bhatti) and to everyone else in the Chamber that I am committed to working constructively and on a cross-party basis on this issue. It is too important to not take all views into account and work together, so I really welcome opportunities to talk to individuals about the issues that have been raised in the debate. However, I will not apologise for taking longer to develop these reforms, because that time has been spent talking to thousands of parents, young people and teachers around the country to make sure their voices were embedded in what we put out for consultation. I also make no apology for taking time to transition into these reforms. As we have heard from so many Members across the Chamber, trust is low, and it is really important that we build the new system with children and families.

That does not mean, though, that we are not acting now. The investment we have been talking about is going into our communities straightaway, whether that is the £3.7 billion that we are already starting to invest in specialist places around the country or the £4 billion that we are investing in the services we have talked about today: Experts at Hand, the educational psychologists and speech and language therapists who will now be available to local schools; and the inclusive mainstream fund, which will be going directly into schools. Those are huge investments that this Government are making. The OBR made its projections before it had seen our reform plans and the huge investments we are making, including new investment going in during 2028-29, which I know the hon. Member for Meriden and Solihull East will have seen.

I agree wholeheartedly with everyone who has raised the importance of early intervention and of putting in as much support as possible as quickly as possible. So many families have told me that if support had been available much quicker, their needs would not have escalated—they would not be out of education and would not have needed to leave their local schools. We have also heard about the importance of inclusion. My hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) spoke powerfully about why it is so critical that children with special educational needs and disabilities are at the heart of the education system. They have so much to offer, and every school should be an inclusive school, but that does not mean that we do not also need special schools, and the £3.7 billion of investment I have talked about will create new specialist places.

Let me turn to the points made by the hon. Member for Farnham and Bordon. First and most importantly, our intention in these reforms is to improve outcomes for children. That is our guiding principle—our No. 1 outcome. The hon. Member mentioned the long waiting lists to which so many families are exposed. Addressing those waits is the point of the reforms. We are putting in place educational psychologists, speech and language therapists, and so many others, so that schools can draw on them and children can access that support without a lengthy wait or a battle for an EHCP and a diagnosis. Under our reform plans, that provision will be available as part of the mainstream system.

Critically, education, health and care plans will remain, and they will be available for children who need them. We know that too many children are forced to apply to get an EHCP because their needs are not being met in mainstream schools. The majority of children with special educational needs and disabilities in our school system do not have an EHCP, but are on the SEND register. They are the children who are often being badly let down. Our reforms will extend rights for those children, including new statutory duties on schools to develop inclusion plans and individual support plans. There will be new layers of support with targeted and targeted plus, new national standards, and new duties on teacher training. My hon. Friend the Member for Broxtowe (Juliet Campbell) spoke powerfully about the importance of teacher training, with every single teacher trained to support children with special educational needs and disabilities, so that every class is accessible.

As ever, my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) talked expertly about the issue. We are grateful for the work of her Committee and the huge amount of time it put in to its report. I will address her points about transition and accountability within the transition. There are safeguards that I think will reassure parents: every child who is in a special school will remain in a special school, we will build the new system before anyone transitions into that new system, and somebody with an existing EHCP will move on to either an EHCP or an individual support plan, and that will be backed by the tribunal.

There were lots of questions about individual support plans and accountability. Ofsted will be looking at individual support plans and developing a new complaints process with an independent role. Importantly, if a family does not feel that their needs are being met by the mainstream system, they will still be able to request a needs assessment and that will be backed by the tribunal. There will still be access to the tribunal, and the tribunal will remain an important part of the system.

We do not want families to have to go to a tribunal, though. We want to deliver a system that works, where families’ voices are put at the heart of decision making and where accountability sits not on the shoulders of families, but that it is for us—the Department for Education, the Department of Health and Social Care, and the Government—to hold local authorities to account. I was asked why we are we going ahead with local SEND reform plans and asking councils to develop them. We are clear that councils need to deliver today for children with special educational needs and disabilities; as we have heard in the debate, there is too much failure and we are determined to hold councils to account.

We are committed to a full consultation. We welcome comments on every aspect of these proposals, and I ask everyone in this Chamber to make sure that you are holding events, talking to your constituents and pointing them towards the consultation, because this is a generational opportunity to change the system. Families have been failed for too long, and it is only by listening to them that we will get this right.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

There were far too many uses of “you” and “your” throughout speeches today. Members need to check the language they use. I call Gregory Stafford to wind up.

Education

Georgia Gould Excerpts

Monday 23rd March 2026 Written Corrections

[David Reed]

We have heard the argument repeatedly that it was the Conservatives and the coalition Government that brought in these changes. I am someone with a plan 2 loan. I was in the generation that Blair told to go to university, and at no point did anyone in that Blair Government talk about how the jobs market would take on so many graduates or, most importantly, who would pay for those people to go to university. Does the Minister agree that the 50% of school leavers who went to university should be paid for by the 50% that did not?

[Georgia Gould]

I think it is really relevant to make sure that the public know who created this system—and not only created it, but froze those loans 10 times over the last 12 years—[Interruption.] I know that it is inconvenient for the Conservatives to be reminded of these truths, but we have lived through them.

[Official Report, 18 March 2026; Vol. 782, c. 929.]

 

Written correction submitted by the Minister for School Standards, the hon. Member for Queen's Park and Maida Vale (Georgia Gould):

[Georgia Gould]

I think it is really relevant to make sure that the public know who created this system—and not only created it, but froze those loans for 10 of the last 12 years—[Interruption.] I know that it is inconvenient for the Conservatives to be reminded of these truths, but we have lived through them.

Student Loans

Georgia Gould Excerpts

Wednesday 18th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

I beg to move

an amendment, to leave out from “House” to the end of the Question and add:

“recognises that the Government inherited the current broken student loans system, including Plan 2, which was devised by previous administrations; welcomes the Government’s commitment to make the system fairer and financially sustainable; further welcomes the support the Government is providing to young people through the Youth Guarantee; supports the Government’s target for two thirds of young people to achieve higher level skills by the age of 25, including reversing the decline in apprenticeships under the previous Government; and further supports the reintroduction of maintenance grants, which had been scrapped under the previous Government, to help ensure that background is not a barrier to opportunity for young people.”

I welcome the Opposition’s focus today on opportunities for young people, student loans and apprenticeships. I am pleased that the House has the opportunity to scrutinise this broken system devised by the Conservatives, who tripled tuition fees, introduced plan 2 loans and presided over a decade that saw a 40% drop in young people starting apprenticeships.

[David Reed]

We have heard the argument repeatedly that it was the Conservatives and the coalition Government that brought in these changes. I am someone with a plan 2 loan. I was in the generation that Blair told to go to university, and at no point did anyone in that Blair Government talk about how the jobs market would take on so many graduates or, most importantly, who would pay for those people to go to university. Does the Minister agree that the 50% of school leavers who went to university should be paid for by the 50% that did not?

[Georgia Gould]

I think it is really relevant to make sure that the public know who created this system—and not only created it, but froze those loans 10 times over the last 12 years—[Interruption.] I know that it is inconvenient for the Conservatives to be reminded of these truths, but we have lived through them.

[Simon Hoare (North Dorset) (Con)]

I must be suffering from some sort of political amnesia, because I was absolutely convinced that it was a Labour Government that introduced tuition fees in the first place. Maybe the Minister will correct me.

[Georgia Gould]

I was talking about plan 2—[Interruption.] The debate today that has been called by the Opposition is about plan 2 loans—a system that was created in 2012 by the Conservatives.

[Alex Sobel (Leeds Central and Headingley) (Lab/Co-op)]

I have read the motion and the amendment. Students today are on a new loan—the plan 5 loan—and Conservative Members have completely forgotten current students. The Government amendment talks about the system in the round. Can my hon. Friend reassure me that the Government are going to look at the system in the round and not just at plan 2, so that all students and graduates have a fairer system?

[Georgia Gould]

I thank my hon. Friend for his advocacy on this issue. I know that he represents a number of students, and this is something that he has raised continually. We have heard the concerns about student finance, and it is something that we will be looking at. I am really happy to take that conversation forward.

[Dr Murrison]

My constituents are not interested in the past, particularly the distant past; they are interested in the future. They have heard what the Conservatives would do, but we have yet to hear from the Government of the day what they will do. Will the Minister enlighten us?

[Georgia Gould]

I think that the past is really relevant. I was a council leader during the last Government and I saw the cuts to local youth services, to early years support and to all our public services. We lived through that time when young people really were at the back of the queue, and we are rebuilding from that through investment in tackling child poverty, in youth services and in schools, and through the historic investment in special educational needs and disabilities provision. Those choices that we are making really matter, and are relevant to the discussion we are having.

In terms of what we are actually doing, we are increasing the threshold to £29,385 this year, which will help to support people this year after the threshold was frozen for four years by the previous Government.

[Helena Dollimore]

The Opposition talk about amnesia. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is they who have collective amnesia about the system they created? My generation certainly do not have amnesia about the debt repayments we made when Liz Truss crashed the economy and sent interest rates soaring—that is what the Conservatives presided over. We do not have collective amnesia about them abolishing maintenance grants for the lowest income students. It is this Government who are acting for my generation with the Renters’ Rights Act 2025—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. I just remind Members that interventions need to be shorter than that.

[Georgia Gould]

rose—

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

I’ve got a short one!

[Georgia Gould]

I would be delighted to take the right hon. Member’s incredibly short intervention.

[Sir Desmond Swayne]

The Minister’s hon. Friend, the hon. Member for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel), asked a perfectly reasonable question about looking at the thing in the round, and her answer was that she would take the conversation forward. I think we need more than that.

[Georgia Gould]

We have acknowledged the issues and the unfairness in the system. The Prime Minister, the Chancellor and the Secretary of State for Education have acknowledged that, and we have said that we will look at it.

I will make progress. Under the last Government, the number of young people not in education, employment or training rose by 250,000. Today, nearly 1 million young people are not in education, employment or training. That is the legacy of the Conservatives, but this Government are turning that around. We are renewing the post-16 education landscape and celebrating routes into vocational education not by restricting university, but by opening up new high-quality vocational routes. We are introducing new V-levels and new foundation apprenticeships and supporting students to get excellent university education across the country.

The Opposition talk a lot about higher education and suggest that too many young people go to university. It is interesting that they can never tell us who should no longer go or which courses they should not study.

[Laura Trott]

I just told you!

[Georgia Gould]

Did the right hon. Member tell me who should not go to university? I can tell the Conservatives that when they close the drawbridge, it is pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds who will end up not at university. That is the consequence. We are opening up access to apprenticeships and vocational routes not by closing down university routes, but by opening up other routes.

[Dr Luke Evans]

The Opposition have made the argument that 30% of courses leave people with a negative bank balance. That is the problem that we are trying to solve. We are not denigrating anyone for wanting to choose; this is about ensuring that the quality of the course means that people have a positive life outcome, not a negative one. Does the Minister agree with that principle?

[Georgia Gould]

We are absolutely committed to driving up the quality of all university courses, and we are acting on that.

Conservative Members have attacked arts and creative courses as the areas where they would like to see a reduction. We have just seen the British talent at the Brits and the Oscars. This is one of our highest-growth industries. We saw this in our schools when there was a reduction in education in the arts, and we are seeing it now as the Conservatives attack those courses in universities.

[Graham Stuart]

Young people in my constituency are looking for a bit of hope. How should they interpret the Minister’s answer to her hon. Friend, the hon. Member for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel), and the fact that the Chancellor has said that young people are at the back of the queue? From that very recent mood music, it does not sound as if there is much to hope for from this Government.

[Georgia Gould]

I have spent the last few months travelling around the country talking to young people about the investment that Labour is putting in to support young people with special educational needs and to support schools and youth clubs. That is what the Labour party is doing in power, and there is huge hope that comes from that. Those are the areas where we need to prioritise investment.

The chance to study in higher education for those who want to and who have the ability to changes lives. We are determined to support students who want to go to university to fulfil their aspirations. We must not lose sight of the value that student loans provide in enabling that and levelling the playing field at the point of access. They remove the up-front financial barriers to study and enable students to repay when they are earning.

[Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) (Lab)]

The Minister is making an excellent and powerful speech on the motion. One aspect of the broken student loans system is the maternity penalty. When someone is on maternity leave, the interest on a student loan continues to accrue, despite income dropping below the repayment threshold. That means that graduates with student loans who take maternity leave face a longer repayment period and a greater total loan amount. Will the Minister take that concern back? Will the Government have a look at this perceived inequality?

[Georgia Gould]

I thank my hon. Friend for making that point. As she knows, increasing security for women on maternity leave is a really important part of this Government’s agenda, and that is why we are taking forward the Employment Rights Act 2025. It is important to note that in the system, if income goes below a threshold and someone is out of work generally, they will not have to pay. That is very different from a commercial loan, but I will absolutely take her point back.

The student loan system delivers tuition fee funding—some £10.7 billion in 2024-25—to our world-class higher education sector, a sector that remains by any objective metric one of our nation’s greatest exports and a global beacon of intellectual excellence. It is important that we remember what is at stake here. From pioneering laboratories developing quantum computing and agritech to those at the forefront of advanced manufacturing and genomics, our universities are the primary engines of the research that will define the 21st century, and the impact of our universities goes beyond their pivotal contribution to the economy and the careers of individual learners. By exposing students to diverse perspectives and expanding their social horizons, these institutions help our young people to build the networks, resilience and life skills that define a person long after they have graduated.

[Rosie Wrighting (Kettering) (Lab)]

I have a creative arts degree. Not only did it give me the opportunity to meet people, importantly, it enabled me to access the fashion industry as somebody growing up outside of London. Does the Minister share my concern that removing those degrees would create London-centric creative industries?

[Georgia Gould]

I thank my hon. Friend for that powerful point. Her creative arts degree was of huge benefit in getting her to this place.

[Dr Murrison]

Does the Minister think that the creative industries are the exclusive province of universities? If that is what she thinks, can I invite her to visit Trowbridge college in my constituency—an excellent further education college—and see what it is doing with multimedia to give kids the skills they need, as part of the growth in the economy that the Government are sorely lacking?

[Georgia Gould]

Of course I recognise the critical role that FE colleges play in supporting children into the creative industries. That is why this Government are backing FE colleges after the previous Government failed to do so. However, we do not believe that closing down routes to university is the best way to support our creative industries. We can have both, and we can have opportunities for both.

[Laurence Turner]

Is it not also the case that kids from working-class backgrounds were increasingly shut out of traditional apprenticeship routes under the previous Government because of the artificial entrance requirements, which employers said were blocking them from hiring the best? Employers said that those requirements should be scrapped, but the Department for Education blocked that under its previous management.

[Georgia Gould]

We saw a 40% reduction in young people’s apprenticeships over a decade. That was the legacy of the Conservative party.

While the foundational principles of our higher education funding and student finance system might be solid, they are straining after more than a decade of neglect and mismanagement, on top of the structural flaws baked into the system by the Conservatives. First, a legacy of seven years of frozen tuition fees has contributed in no small part to a significant and growing number of English higher education providers facing financial challenges. Analysis published last autumn by the Office for Students indicates that without mitigating action, some 124 providers—45% of those included in the OfS financial sustainability report—could face a deficit in 2025-26.

[Tim Roca (Macclesfield) (Lab)]

The Minister is making an important point. The economics of higher education are actually quite complicated; there is a great deal of cross-subsidy, with the humanities and the arts effectively supporting science, medicine and engineering courses and so on. Does the Minister agree that we should be worried that the Opposition parties’ proposals would put jobs and the viability of universities at risk?

[Georgia Gould]

My hon. Friend makes an important contribution to this debate.

The Government have taken the tough, immediate action that is required, including by making the difficult decision to increase tuition fees by forecast inflation, balancing the need to give the sector stability with fairness to students and taxpayers. We are also asking more of the sector: we expect higher education providers to demonstrate that they deliver the very best outcomes, both for those students and for the country, in return for the increased investment we are asking students to make. To achieve this, this Government will link future fees increases to university quality, as I have said. This will protect taxpayers’ investment in higher education and incentivise high-quality provision for students without taking away opportunities.

[Edward Argar (Melton and Syston) (Con)]

The Minister is typically generous with her time and courteous in the number of interventions she accepts. May I gently take her back to lines 3 to 4 of the text of the Prime Minister’s amendment on student loans, which state that this House

“welcomes the Government’s commitment to make the system fairer and financially sustainable”.

To avoid this sounding like jam tomorrow and to reassure young people—I have a lot of respect for the Minister, and I will be generous—can she give one or two concrete announcements today of specific measures that she is bringing forward that will achieve that commitment?

[Georgia Gould]

We are lifting the threshold, which will make a difference this year for students. We have already announced that, and we have said that we will continue to look at this matter as we look at a wide range of issues. We accept that the system created by the Conservatives is not fair.

More broadly, this Government are resetting the contract for young people across the landscape. Beyond our new deal for young people who do not go to university, we will support more young people into work and training through a £2.5 billion investment in the youth guarantee and growth and skills levy over the next three years and—this is incredibly concrete—we will support almost a million young people and deliver almost 500,000 opportunities to earn and learn.

[Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab/Co-op)]

I welcome this week’s announcement of the new deal for young people beyond university. One of the challenges in a seat like Peterborough is that not enough young people get to either apprenticeships or university. Does the Minister agree that one of the challenges we face is that we spend so much time in this place and in the media debating university routes as the path to success, but we do not spend half as much time as we need to discussing apprenticeships? The youth guarantee starts to put that right.

[Georgia Gould]

My hon. Friend makes an incredibly important point. We need to open up access to apprenticeships. That is why the Government are making this investment, and it is why we have set that ambitious target for young people to go to university and to access apprenticeships.

[Robin Swann]

On that point, does the Minister agree that there is another way? The Open University also allows people to earn and learn at the same time. The situation is not as simple as university or apprenticeship. There is a middle way and, as a former graduate of the Open University, I encourage the Government to support it.

[Georgia Gould]

We are committed to opening up those routes to lifelong learning, and we are setting out plans on that. I welcome that intervention.

[Dr Murrison]

With hindsight, does the Minister regret Tony Blair’s announcement in the late 1990s that more than 50% of school leavers should go to university? Would it not have been better to have said that all young people leaving school should either go to university or into high-quality apprenticeships or training?

[Georgia Gould]

Opposition Members were accusing me of talking about the past, but I think I was nine years old when that was going on. I do not regret the real focus on opening up access to university, because that opened it up to disadvantaged pupils who might never have had that opportunity. Today, we recognise that we need both those routes. There has not been enough investment or focus on vocational pathways. We absolutely agree with that, and we are putting that right. It is our ambition to have a more sustainable, more specialised and more efficient sector that better aligns with the needs of the economy.

[Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)]

The Minister is being generous with her time, and I thank her on behalf of Opposition Members. Does she believe that there is an oversupply of courses in higher education? She has spoken about trying to evolve and reform the model, and the concern among Opposition Members is that there seems to be pressure on a lot of children to go to university, even though they will not get a graduate bonus associated with that. A lot of us question the financial viability of HE. What are her views on that?

[Georgia Gould]

We want young people to have a choice: to go to university, to study, to take up an apprenticeship or to earn and learn. We want that range of routes to be available and for young people to have high-quality careers education, so that they know what the opportunities are in their local communities.

We want higher education providers to go further to give their students the best course and employment outcomes, ensuring that the sector remains globally competitive. The Government are committed to ensuring that higher education is open to all who have the ability and the desire to pursue it. In the 2028-29 academic year, we will be reintroducing targeted, means-tested maintenance grants of up to £1,000 a year, increasing the cash in students’ pockets without increasing their debt. To help students from the most disadvantaged backgrounds, we are already delivering on a commitment to future-proof maintenance loans by increasing them in line with forecast inflation every academic year to try to ensure that support keeps pace with financial pressures. In the academic year 2026-27, care leavers will become automatically eligible to receive the maximum rate of maintenance loans, which will provide vital extra support for one of the most vulnerable groups in society.

[Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)]

I welcome support for people from the most vulnerable groups who are heading to university, but will the Minister acknowledge that by enabling those groups to take the maximum amount of support, the Government are also enabling them to have the maximum amount of debt at the end of their university careers? A frequent problem throughout all this has been the fact that either the people in the middle who do not quite get the support that they need or those at the far end of the system who do need support are saddled with the most debt, because they will not have the parental assistance that would help them to leverage against the loan repayments for the rest of their careers.

[Georgia Gould]

I think it important to make it clear—some people watching the debate will be worried about this—that these are not normal loans, in that young people who are not earning, or are earning below the threshold, do not have to pay anything. In the long term, if they have not earned enough by the end of their careers, they do not have to pay the whole amount, and they do not have to pass that on to future generations.

[Dr Ben Spencer (Runnymede and Weybridge) (Con)]

I thank the Minister for giving way: she has been very generous with her time. I think there is a point of principle in this debate, and I should like to hear the Minister’s thoughts on it. Does she believe that there is any degree offered by a university in which it is not fair to invest taxpayers’ money? If the quality is not good enough, surely it is not fair for the individual to be indebted. Will the Minister concede that there probably are some courses, across the country, that it is not fair for the taxpayer to subsidise?

[Georgia Gould]

I have made it very clear that we want to increase the quality of courses, and that is one of the conditions that we attached to increasing the fees in a fair way, but we want to do that by ensuring that those courses are of high enough quality, rather than scrapping the opportunity for young people to go on them.

Looking further ahead, I can tell the House that the Prime Minister’s ambition is to see two thirds of young people in higher-level learning by the age of 25. With the lifelong learning entitlement, which will be launched in January 2027—a policy that the last Administration failed, year after year, to deliver—we are transforming higher education from a “one-shot” opportunity into a flexible and responsive system with learners at its centre. As was mentioned earlier, the LLE will allow learners to fund individual modules and reskill throughout their careers, at colleges and universities alike.

We now have a responsibility to ensure that the benefits of higher education are maintained for future generations, and to clean up a student loan system in which interest rates have been allowed to spiral and students are confused about what is the right path for them. We absolutely recognise that there are failings in the system, but it is not a system that we built; it was a system that the Conservatives created. We know that student loan repayments are a concern for graduates, which is why we increased the plan 2 repayment threshold last year and why we are increasing it again next month, to £29,385. Borrowers who earn below that amount annually will not be required to make any repayments at all. This threshold is higher than the median graduate salary three years after graduation.

Graduates generally go on to benefit from higher earnings, and it remains reasonable for those who gain the largest financial benefits from their degrees to contribute more towards the cost of their studies than those who have not gone to university, or graduates earning lower salaries. Lower earners will still benefit from the unique protections that student loans offer. Any unpaid loan balance, including interest accrued, will still be cancelled at the end of the loan term at no detriment to the individual, outstanding debt is never passed on to a borrower’s family, and having an outstanding student loan is not a barrier to accessing a mortgage. Student loan balances do not appear on borrower credit records, although regular student loan repayments will be considered, alongside other living costs, as part of the affordability check for mortgage applications.

I want to say how seriously the Government take the cost of living challenges that young people face. Too often this generation have found their challenges ignored. We are working hard to tackle these issues by extending Government-funded childcare, reducing energy bills, freezing rail fares, rolling out free breakfast clubs, building new homes and introducing the Renters’ Rights Act 2025.

Before Conservative Members once again line up to criticise the decisions that we have made, I would like to take a moment to remind them of their track record on this matter. Plan 2 student loans were designed and introduced in 2012 by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition, with a repayment threshold of £21,000 per year and interest rates of up to 3% above inflation. Those are the very interest rates that the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are now calling to be reduced. Having said that they would increase the plan 2 repayment threshold to reflect earnings, they froze it for four years. The Conservatives then froze it in 2016 and in 2017, and again from 2021 to 2024. In total, there was a decade of freezes by the opposition parties. It is their mismanagement that now necessitates a further freeze to the threshold. I do not remember any of this outrage from those Members when they created and built this system.

As we have heard, the Opposition’s solution is to cut courses and cut opportunities. We will not make reckless and unfunded changes to student loans. Student finance and higher education funding is a complex, interconnected system. We are considering a range of options to make the system fairer, but we must be fiscally responsible and consider carefully how change would be funded. Politics is about choices.

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

Would the Minister consider doing something about the cost of accommodation in university towns and cities? Where I come from in north Somerset there is no university, and at the moment people do not really have the option to go anywhere except a city, which is incredibly expensive. Would she give some consideration to reducing those costs on ordinary working families?

[Georgia Gould]

I thank the hon. Member for that comment, and that is why we are supporting maintenance grants to help students with the cost of living.

I will conclude by saying that our approach to further reform of the system will be deliberate, evidenced and fiscally responsible. We are here not to tear down the house, but to repair the roof that was left to leak.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

Education

Georgia Gould Excerpts

Monday 16th March 2026 Written Corrections

[Rosie Duffield]

… Unfortunately, the Government’s funding announcement in their White Paper is just a drop in the ocean compared with what is needed to radically improve SEND services in east Kent. Can the Minister tell me what other steps she will take to deliver urgently needed improvements in SEND provision in my constituency, as the funding looks likely to equate to only a few thousand pounds extra per school?

[Georgia Gould]

My hon. Friend will know that we have recently announced support to local authorities like Kent in order to address 90% of their deficits. We are building three new special schools in Kent and putting in place £3.7 billion in capital investment, and the allocation for Kent will be coming onboard shortly.

[Official Report, 2 March 2026; Vol. 781, c. 567.]

Written correction submitted by the Minister for School Standards, the hon. Member for Queen's Park and Maida Vale (Georgia Gould):

[Georgia Gould]

… We are building two new special schools and a new alternative provision in Kent and putting in place £3.7 billion in capital investment, and the allocation for Kent will be coming onboard shortly.

SEND Provision: Local Authorities

Georgia Gould Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd March 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

I thank the hon. Member for Dorking and Horley (Chris Coghlan) for his powerful and sobering speech, and for securing the debate. He and I have talked before about his research, which is heartbreaking and demonstrates powerfully the need for change. We have arranged a date for me to visit and speak to some of the families he is working with, and I am happy to make time after the debate to talk with the families who are here today. This is just unimaginable loss.

The hon. Member set out that he has gathered 200 stories, but I understand that there are thousands more stories in which children and families have been failed. I have travelled around the country to talk to families, and I have also heard so many stories.

[Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Dorking and Horley (Chris Coghlan) for his truly emotional and very caring speech. While the Minister is travelling around the country, will she spend some time in west Somerset, where 2,500 children are on the crisis list?

[Georgia Gould]

I thank the hon. Member for inviting me to speak to families in her area.

The conversations that I have had have so often been about parents battling for years to get the support that they know their children need, as the hon. Member for Dorking and Horley said, and about the powerlessness they feel as they watch their children struggle and fall behind.

[Kirith Entwistle (Bolton North East) (Lab)]

At my online advice surgery yesterday, I met constituent Jenny Wilson, who has fought tirelessly for her son Maxwell to receive support from their local authority—he is without a formal diagnosis. Jenny and other parents in my constituency would like to know what more the Government are doing to help children who do not have a formal diagnosis and are still being denied EHCPs or any additional support.

[Georgia Gould]

I very often hear that exact story: too much support is locked behind a diagnosis that takes years, or behind a bureaucratic process. The reforms that we have set out move investment directly into schools and services that wrap around schools. We are introducing two new layers of support—targeted and targeted-plus—that will be available to children, without that battle for external validation. Teachers will be able to draw on that to support children in their classrooms. That is backed up by two new pieces of investment: £1.6 billion going directly into schools; and £1.8 billion into a new “experts at hand” service, to pay for speech and language therapists, occupational therapists, educational psychologists, specialist teachers and others who will support schools. Their support will be available for young people, including the one mentioned by my hon. Friend.

[Chris Coghlan]

I agree with what the Minister says, and it is good that all this provision is coming in, but I simply do not understand why, if she is so confident that these reforms will work, it is necessary to reduce children’s rights. I know that she is likely to say that the Government are not doing so, but it is the view of KCs—an authority I trust—that that is happening. In theory, if the reforms succeed, the demand to exercise those legal rights should naturally fall, because families should not need to use them, so whether or not those rights are there should be slightly irrelevant. However, if the reforms do not succeed, those rights gives families whose trust has collapsed the peace of mind that they can, in the worst cases, go to a tribunal and save their children’s lives.

[Georgia Gould]

It is really important to say to families that we are expanding their support and their rights. There will be new legal duties on schools to develop these new layers of support, which will mean that support is available earlier.

[Liam Conlon (Beckenham and Penge) (Lab)]

I thank the hon. Member for Dorking and Horley (Chris Coghlan) for securing this debate. It is so important that the lived experiences of parents are valued by local authorities and other services, and too often they are not. In 2023, two of my constituents, Jo and Chris, tragically lost their son Leo to suicide. Leo was a bright, intelligent, inquisitive child. He was also neurodivergent and struggled with his diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. He is featured in the Times article that the hon. Member mentioned. The coroner’s report into his death found that he had been failed by multiple agencies over a sustained period. The hon. Member kindly reached out to Jo and Chris to learn more about what happened to Leo and the lessons that could be learned, and I am really grateful to him for doing so. Will the Minister agree to meet me, so that we can ensure the voices of parents like Jo and Chris are given the weight that they deserve?

[Georgia Gould]

I thank my hon. Friend for sharing that tragic story. Of course I would be willing to meet him to discuss it further. These are stories of failure, and we need to do better for these families and change things. We need a system in which every school is set up to support children with special educational needs and disabilities. We are making it mandatory for every teacher to be trained to support children with special educational needs and disabilities, investing directly in schools to provide that support and setting out new national standards and new accountability for schools.

The hon. Member for Dorking and Horley made a really important point about families still being able to apply for specialist support. Any individual who feels that their child is not getting the support they need through the targeted or targeted-plus offer will be able to have a needs assessment. If they are unhappy with the needs assessment, they will be able to go to the tribunal to challenge that decision, so there will be individual redress in the system.

But it cannot just be for individual families to hold the system to account, because that is the system we have at the moment, with families having to take on legal battles, and for those who do not have the resource, it is not possible to do that. We in the Department for Education and Ofsted have to hold institutions to account. We are really clear that we will provide more support for councils—we are supporting them with 90% of their deficits—but with that support comes much stronger accountability.

[Chris Coghlan]

I have repeatedly raised with the DFE over the last year very serious misconduct by Surrey county council, including concealing for over 14 months the fact that it had the highest number of complaints in the country and reclassifying complaints as inquiries to reduce complaint volumes. As far as I am aware, no disciplinary action has been taken. This is not a party political point, because it is a Conservative county council, and I know that, off the record, some Conservative county councillors feel exactly the same way about their own administration.

I worked with the Department of Health and Social Care on reforming the Mental Capacity Act 2005, and I was very impressed by its willingness to acknowledge misconduct and the need for accountability and transparency in that case. To be frank, all I have seen from the Department for Education is a culture of protecting one’s own and of cover-ups. When will serious action be taken against local authorities that commit misconduct on SEND and systematic lawbreaking? The Secretary of State for Education said that local authorities will be held to account, but given what has happened with Surrey county council, how can we have any confidence that they actually will?

[Georgia Gould]

Following the letters that the hon. Member and others wrote to the Secretary of State, she instructed further intensive activity in Surrey, including a number of deep dives into the issues that were raised, which will report back shortly. There are SEND advisers going in, and there is very close monitoring of what is happening in Surrey and the progress being made, but I take the wider point that families have made to me and Members across the Chamber that there needs to be greater accountability for local authorities. We recognise the challenging circumstances that local authorities have been in, but more investment is going in, and with that investment has to come stronger monitoring, accountability and intervention when there is failure.

As is set out in the schools White Paper, we are strengthening what we are able to do in a number of areas. We are very clear that if there is repeated and long-term failure, we will take SEND from local authorities. Working with the Disabled Children’s Partnership, we are setting out new conditions under which local authorities will need to learn from tribunal judgments, publish action plans on the back of them and show much greater transparency and action.

[Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)]

I thank the Minister for giving way, and I particularly thank my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Dorking and Horley (Chris Coghlan) for securing the debate and for the manner in which he introduced it. Since he has been in this place, he has been a strong advocate for SEND families, and I thank him for that.

The Minister has heard me talk about Sara Sharif before, and my hon. Friend has talked about her during the debate. We are clearly very concerned about children’s services in Surrey county council and I hope that we have shown that intervention is needed. The Minister may disagree, but I beg her to take away that we want to ensure that the culture of children’s services at Surrey county council is not transferred to West Surrey council or East Surrey council in the future. If the Government agree with my assessment that intervention is needed now, they need to intervene to ensure that that culture is not transferred, so that we have the fresh start that vulnerable children in our constituencies so desperately need.

[Georgia Gould]

As I set out, we have appointed a SEND adviser who is offering that challenge to Surrey county council. We will continue to monitor the situation very carefully and I await the outcomes of the deep dives. I will be meeting parents, along with the hon. Member for Dorking and Horley, to hear directly from them. I am committed to continuing to work with all the relevant MPs to ensure that children are getting the support that they need in Surrey. More generally, I am committed to ensuring that there is strong accountability and monitoring of performance, as well as putting in new investment and support.

I want to address the concern mentioned by the hon. Member for Dorking and Horley that some young people who had previously had support will no longer get that support under the new system. I refer colleagues to the draft annexes that set out the specialist provision packages. I hope that those annexes reassure them that, as well as looking at children who have physical disabilities and complex learning difficulties, two of the specialist provision packages focus on social and emotional needs, and the interface with mental health.

[Chris Coghlan]

I fully believe that the Minister’s heart is in the right place, but for me the test is what lawyers and KCs—not to big them up too much—are saying about the White Paper: specialist educational lawyers are clear that the White Paper is reducing children’s rights. I would love to support the White Paper, but our country desperately needs reforms in this area, as this debate has highlighted. If the Minister wants my support, she will have to satisfy KCs that there is no reduction in rights, and at the moment there is.

[Georgia Gould]

Attached to the schools White Paper and the SEND consultation document is our own analysis of children’s rights and all the areas where we are strengthening them. I want to be really clear that the intention of the reforms is to bring in more support earlier and to extend the rights that children have access to.

[Dr Ben Spencer (Runnymede and Weybridge) (Con)]

The Minister is being generous with her time and I thank her for giving way. I want to reiterate the point about the families who have already gone through the system and who have fought for EHCPs, many of whom have had to go through tribunals and feel like they are having to do everything on their own. I come from a mental health background, and I am surprised that the system does not have what I would call a care co-ordinator to support families who are going through this difficult process.

Families are genuinely scared that the Government’s proposed reforms will lead to a stripping away of support. In my constituency, where we are served by Surrey and Borders partnership NHS foundation trust, it takes a year and a half to get an autism diagnosis, and even longer if people need medication for ADHD. I have raised that in this place with Ministers from the Department of Health and Social Care, but can the Minister reassure me that as part of the approach to SEND, she and her Department are looking at the interface between education and health? I understand what she says about the absence of a diagnosis not meaning that a child should not be supported—we could have another debate about that—but for many children a diagnosis is very important, and it needs to be timely and treatment needs to be quick and effective.

Finally, before I test your patience, Madam Deputy Speaker, may I invite the Minister to come to Meath school, a special educational needs school in Ottershaw in my constituency? It is an amazing place and every time I go there I learn so much, so it would be great if she could come along and meet the fantastic kids and teachers there.

[Georgia Gould]

I confess that I think I have committed to go to every constituency in the country, but I will do my best. [Laughter.] I cannot promise that every single ask will be responded to quickly, but I want to get to every community, and we will also be doing a number of online events as part of the consultation to ensure that everyone has the chance to feed in.

To respond to the hon. Member’s questions, first, it is important to make clear that we are not saying that children do not need a diagnosis. Diagnosis plays an important part in the system for children and young people, but it cannot and should not be a barrier to accessing support in the education system. Schools must have the tools to identify and respond to need, and the resource and well-evidenced interventions to wrap support around children without a diagnosis. However, we are committed to working with Health colleagues on improving the whole system, and the SEND consultation document is clear about that further work on accountability —not just for local authorities, but for integrated care boards. The hon. Member will know about the review of some of the inequalities in access to diagnosis.

The point about care co-ordinators and parental support is well made—that is something I have heard a lot from families. Within the consultation, we have asked a question about how that can be better delivered, and we are committed to doing more in that space. Lots of different ideas have come forward from different disabled children’s organisations and from parents, but I want to use the consultation to hear directly from parents about what is most helpful for them. In some models, parents who have been through the system are paid to support other parents, and the special educational needs and disabilities information advice and support service already exists. We want to look at all the different models, and I would welcome insights from across the House.

I want to provide some important reassurance to those parents who the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Dr Spencer) talked about who are concerned about the changes. First, any child at a special school will remain there for as long as they want. We have deliberately taken a careful and staged approach and are putting investment up front, so we are building a new system before we look to transition into it. We are also asking the Children’s Commissioner to take an independent view of system readiness. Secondly, we are clear that any child transitioning from an education, health and care plan must move on to an individual support plan, with the wraparound support I have mentioned.

[Chris Coghlan]

Will the Minister give way?

[Georgia Gould]

I will give way one final time.

[Chris Coghlan]

The Minister is being very generous with her time, and I am being slightly cheeky.

I have a horrendous case involving a child in Dorking who is 12 years old. I saw the mother in September, a week after the child’s second suicide attempt. The child and adolescent mental health services wrote to the GP one week later, saying that their risk of suicide was low, but there have been more self-harm incidents since then. This child has autism, and last week the county council rejected them from getting an EHCP, so I am literally at my wits’ end about what to do on this case. First, if I were to write to the Minister about this particular case, I would be hugely grateful if she could intervene. Secondly, how would she envisage this child’s situation improving after the reforms?

[Georgia Gould]

That is a truly tragic case. Of course, I cannot comment without knowing the full circumstances, but I encourage the hon. Member to write to me. There are two ways that the reforms could improve the situation. First, rather than having to wait for years, that support will go in a lot earlier. As well as the particular support for children with special educational needs and disabilities, we are working to bring more mental health support into schools to support children and young people. I mentioned the specialist provision packages and the drafts there, because I often hear from parents whose children do not get as much attention in the system because they internalise their social and emotional needs. Children who externalise those needs are sometimes not well supported either, but where they are internalised, those children get missed. We focused on those children and their need for specialist provision. For those children who can be supported in the mainstream, we want to put that support in earlier, but we want to have pathways into specialist support for those who need them.

[Daniel Francis (Bexleyheath and Crayford) (Lab)]

I declare my usual interest, as my wife is a special needs co-ordinator and one of our children has an EHCP. I thank the hon. Member for Dorking and Horley (Chris Coghlan) for bringing forward this debate. My constituents have seen our London borough of Bexley council have a safety valve agreement and an Ofsted inspection of systemic failings, which we are hopefully about to come out of. I have seen those things as a councillor and as a parent. I am the parent of twins, and I can tell the House that despite having an EHCP, the transfer for my daughter with an EHCP was so much more stressful than it was for my other daughter. I welcome the changes, as the Minister knows. There are still a few things we need to iron out in these conversations about transition, support for schools and the role of ICBs. Can the Minister commit that, through the consultation and legislative process, we will continue to hear those voices to get the package right? I know at first hand that the system is broken, and we have to get it right for these families.

[Georgia Gould]

I thank my hon. Friend for his long-term advocacy on this critical issue and for how much he has inputted into our work to improve the system. I am glad that he asked that question, because I wanted to finish with the voices of children, young people and families. We are committed to the accountability that has been asked for, and we will shortly be writing to all local authorities asking them to develop SEND improvement plans. We will be monitoring that carefully and will ensure that the voices of families are part of the intelligence that we receive about performance.

[Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)]

I apologise for being late for the debate; business was going more rapidly than I expected.

Many of us strongly believe that it is important that children are educated as close to home as possible. Unfortunately, I have a piece of casework in my constituency where one child is doing a three-hour round trip every single day just to get to school, which is unacceptable. With the new changes, will there be an option to change that? It would be helpful if the Minister could expand on that.

[Georgia Gould]

That is such a critical point, and we have heard too many stories about long travel times, and how having to be in transport provokes stress for children, which holds them back. We are determined that every community has access to that support, whether that is inclusive schools or a range of specialist places. That is why we have put £3.7 billion into creating those specialist places around the country, and it is also why we are working on specialist provision packages to ensure that each area has that range of provision. We are determined to build up local provision so that children can grow up close to their friends. I have spoken to young people who have been in the position that my hon. Friend describes. They come back to their communities at 18, and they do not have support networks or friends, and it is so hard to build a life. That has to change, and we are determined to do so.

We have set out our plans after more than a year of engagement, but we want to hear from the constituents of all the Members here and beyond. I am personally committed to travelling and speaking to different voices around the country. We have heard from all the different contexts how things work in rural communities and different parts of the country. It is critical that we get it right. This is a generational opportunity to make change for families who have been let down. I am determined that this will be a full and an open consultation. I ask everyone who is here today, and everyone who is listening, to help us to spread the word so that we hear the families’ voices. Having heard these stories, I feel very deeply—as, I am sure, does the hon. Member for Dorking and Horley—the responsibility to change things for those families, and I am committed to working with Members on both sides of the House to get this right.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

It be remiss of me not to extend an invitation to the Minister to visit St Edward’s school in my constituency of Romsey and Southampton North.

Question put and agreed to.

Oral Answers to Questions

Georgia Gould Excerpts

Monday 2nd March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Yuan Yang (Earley and Woodley) (Lab)]

2. What recent assessment she has made of the effectiveness of the system for supporting children with special educational needs and disabilities.

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

On Monday, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education set out ambitious SEND reforms to ensure the system works better for families and children across England. It is clear that families, and the teachers and wider staff trying to support them, have been failed by the system, and that that has had a profound impact on children and young people’s education and wellbeing. We are determined to work with families and professionals around the country to build a system in which children’s needs are met quickly and families do not have to battle because the right inclusive mainstream and specialist support will be available in their communities. We want to hear from young people, parents, teachers and all those who support them, so I ask everyone in the Chamber to bring the voices of their constituents to our consultation.

[Yuan Yang]

Secondary school students with special educational needs have told me of their struggles with academy trusts in south Reading and Shinfield that have failed to properly prioritise inclusion. Will the Minister set out how the schools White Paper will address that on the part of multi-academy trusts? Will she consider visiting Hartland high school and Oakbank school in my constituency to see the progress they have made on that front?

[Georgia Gould]

Accountability is a key part of our reforms, which is why Ofsted is now focused on inclusion. We have also brought in Ofsted inspections for multi-academy trusts. I very much enjoyed meeting one of my hon. Friend’s local academies, which is doing brilliant work, but I recognise that we need to put in the right resource and accountability to ensure that that is happening everywhere. I am always delighted to see best practice.

[Ian Roome (North Devon) (LD)]

I thank the Minister for the Government’s decision to effectively write off about 90% of Devon county council’s SEND debts. I know that will reassure many parents in my constituency.

Will the Minister tell us how the new school curriculum will give schools the flexibility they need to support children with special educational needs across very different parts of the country, including rural areas such as North Devon?

[Georgia Gould]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that we need to ensure that children with SEND have the right support everywhere in the country. That means that we need to ensure that we have the right experts wrapped around schools and that the curriculum meets children’s needs. The Government’s curriculum and assessment review sets out our modern curriculum, including a breadth of learning and enrichment for young people, but we know that it is important to have the right adaptations and flexibilities, and we will be moving forward with that as part of our SEND reforms.

[Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)]

As the Secretary of State knows, there is much concern in my Camborne, Redruth and Hayle constituency about the off-rolling of children with SEND. Will the Minister elaborate on the reforms in the schools White Paper to ensure that mainstream secondary multi-academy trust exclusions will be measured, and that schools will be incentivised to provide the effective SEND provision that all our children deserve?

[Georgia Gould]

We are absolutely clear that every school has to support children with special educational needs and disabilities. Every teacher has to be trained to be a SEND teacher, and every secondary school will be expected to have an inclusion base. We need to have eyes on children to ensure that no child falls through the cracks. That is why the Department for Education will be more closely monitoring pupil flow, including off-rolling. We will work with trusts and local authority schools when we see large numbers of children who are being off-rolled or are out of education in other ways.

[Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)]

I spend a lot of time visiting schools in my constituency and speaking to the hard-working headteachers about the pressures they are under due to spiralling costs and teacher shortages. With the Government’s proposed reforms placing an additional responsibility on schools to create individual support plans, alongside an ambition for more children’s needs to be met within mainstream schools, how will the Minister ensure that schools do not have to make sacrifices that harm the education of every child?

[Georgia Gould]

When developing this policy, we learned from the best schools in the country. I visited schools that have individual support plans for every student and wraparound support; those children are absolutely thriving. We want to make sure that that happens in every school. We are investing in a new national digital individual support plan, and we are putting £4 billion into schools and the services that support them to make that a reality.

[Laura Trott (Sevenoaks) (Con)]

Last week, I asked the Secretary of State a specific question about SEND funding during her statement, which she failed to answer, so I will try again with the Minister today. The £4 billion for SEND announced last week, to be paid over three years, which the Secretary of State described as “new money”, is actually from within the Department’s existing spending review settlement, isn’t it?

[Georgia Gould]

Absolutely, yes; it is money that we have won to put into supporting children with special educational needs and disabilities. It is a priority that we take very seriously. I have seen the failure around the country where, for too long, these families have not been listened to, and too many children are out of education; we need to change that. As part of the spending review, we requested and managed to get new investment that we are putting into schools and the “experts at hand” service to wrap around schools on top of the £3.7 billion we are putting into new specialist places. This is generational reform that will make a huge difference.

We want to work in partnership with colleagues across the House, but we still have not heard from the Conservative party. What are its ideas, and what—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. You are in government, so you do not need to—[Interruption.] Order. When I stand up, please sit. I am trying to be helpful. All these Members are trying to get in, and it is a big day with a big statement coming.

[Georgia Gould]

Apologies, Mr Speaker.

[Mr Speaker]

Okay. I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)]

Trust among families with special educational needs is at rock bottom. Their voices have often been ignored—sometimes with tragic consequences—so while many are open to reform, there is real concern that under the Government’s proposals tribunals will lose the ability to direct specific provision in a child’s best interest, with the risk that families will be trapped in an endless doom loop of dispute with local authorities. If Ministers are serious about tackling that adversarial nature, will the Minister confirm how she will prevent it and protect children’s and parents’ rights?

[Georgia Gould]

We are committed to the tribunal being a backstop for families. We want a much more collaborative system, but we have heard from families how important that backstop of legal rights is, so the tribunal will be there as a backstop if parents are unhappy with the assessment process or the specialist provision package that they have.

When it comes to school placement, hon. Members across the House will know that in many cases, places are being named at special schools that are already full and it is just not safe for them to take those children. Parents will still be able to go to the tribunal, which will be able to quash a decision if it is unhappy, and then the local authority will need to look at it again.

[Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)]

3. What steps she is taking to help tackle the education, health and care plan backlog in Cambridgeshire.

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

The Department is providing targeted help for Cambridgeshire, including a specialist SEND adviser and sector-led improvement support from Islington council. We are actively monitoring Cambridgeshire’s recovery plan to reduce EHCP backlogs and secure better outcomes for children and families. On Monday, the Secretary of State set out our wider ambition for a SEND system that works better for children and families across England. I encourage parents nationwide to look at our consultation on how we will bring the change our children need.

[Ben Obese-Jecty]

The EHCP backlog in Cambridgeshire is a significant challenge. I appreciate what the Minister said about the help that is currently in place. Having read the SEND White Paper, I am struggling to see where the immediate impact will come. I had a letter from a constituent at the weekend who thanked me for helping her child get an EHCP after 74 weeks, and I can give examples that stretch up to nearly two years from an EHCP needs assessment being signed off. I am due to meet Cambridgeshire county council on Friday to discuss this issue in more detail. What advice can the Minister give it on how the SEND White Paper will help it to get on top of the EHCP backlog?

[Georgia Gould]

The hon. Member is right: the timeliness of EHCPs has been unacceptable, and it is something that we are taking seriously. That is why we have put the extra resource in—as part of the schools White Paper, we are putting £200 million directly into councils to support their capacity—but this is something that we will be monitoring closely. I am happy to talk to him in more detail about his concerns.

[John Whitby (Derbyshire Dales) (Lab)]

4. What steps she is taking to help prevent the use of phones by children in schools.

--- Later in debate ---

[Rosie Duffield (Canterbury) (Ind)]

5. What assessment she has made of the adequacy of SEND provision in Kent.

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

The Department has worked closely with NHS England to monitor, support and challenge Kent in making necessary SEND improvements following its area SEND inspections in 2019 and 2022. This has included regular review meetings, attendance at its SEND partnership board and commissioning the support of an expert SEND adviser.

[Rosie Duffield]

I recently hosted a constituency SEND roundtable with education leaders and officials from the Department, where teachers stressed yet again that years of underfunding and diminished support services had left schools on their knees, often unable to meet the needs of the most vulnerable children. Unfortunately, the Government’s funding announcement in their White Paper is just a drop in the ocean compared with what is needed to radically improve SEND services in east Kent. Can the Minister tell me what other steps she will take to deliver urgently needed improvements in SEND provision in my constituency, as the funding looks likely to equate to only a few thousand pounds extra per school?

[Georgia Gould]

My hon. Friend will know that we have recently announced support to local authorities like Kent in order to address 90% of their deficits. We are building three new special schools in Kent and putting in place £3.7 billion in capital investment, and the allocation for Kent will be coming onboard shortly. We have announced £4 billion of extra investment to wrap around schools, including for speech and language therapists as well as money directly into school budgets.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mrs Elsie Blundell (Heywood and Middleton North) (Lab)]

10. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to ensure that local authorities in financial difficulty can deliver effective speech and language therapy for children with SEND.

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

I have talked to so many families who have had to watch their children fall further behind without the speech and language support they need. Alongside measures to address local authority deficits, we are providing £1.8 billion over the next three years for local areas to develop a new “experts at hand” offer, providing mainstream education settings with access to support from services including speech and language therapy.

[Mrs Blundell]

As the Minister knows, the SEND system is not working for children, families or local councils, and it has not been for some time. Despite the record of the Conservatives, we cannot allow children in need of speech and language therapy to lose out. Will the Minister assure me that when it comes to speech and language therapy, the new “experts at hand” service will be utilised effectively, so that each local authority will be able to provide all children with the support they need?

[Georgia Gould]

I am happy to reassure my hon. Friend and I thank her for her advocacy on this important issue. We are rebuilding support across the community. Best Start hubs in every community will be supported by £200 million for children with special educational needs and disabilities, and we are investing £40 million to train up new specialist speech and language staff and educational psychologists to ensure that this support is available in every community.

[Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)]

On the subject of the provision of speech and language therapy for students with special educational needs, Westmorland and Furness council, in my area, was not one of the councils in financial difficulty—until last month, when the Government decided, for the crime of it being the most rural district in the country, to cut 31% of its budget over three years. What confidence can children with special educational needs and their parents in my community have that they are not going to be hit massively by these cuts, and what can the Minister do to put the cuts right?

[Georgia Gould]

We are providing dedicated support for speech and language therapists, educational psychologists and occupational therapists so that they are available to every primary and secondary school. In an average secondary school in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency, we expect that that will amount to about 160 days of support a year.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mary Kelly Foy (City of Durham) (Lab)]

T2. I truly welcome the reform to SEND provision, but, with some schools already making redundancies because of funding, I echo the concerns of teaching unions that the recently announced inclusion grant is too small; it equates to one part-time teaching assistant for the average primary school and two TAs for the average secondary school. Can the Minister reassure me and educators in Durham that adequate funding will be available to make our schools more inclusive for children with SEND while allowing schools to protect the support that children with SEND in mainstream classrooms already have?

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

We are committed to investing in schools. Our plans include an extra £1.6 billion going directly into schools and £1.8 billion going into the wider “experts at hand” service, on top of increasing funding to the schools core budget. In this Parliament, we will continue to grow our investment in both SEND and schools to ensure that every child gets the best start in life.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)]

T5. The ministerial team will be aware that schools in the Arthur Terry learning partnership across my constituency and six others in the west midlands saw nine days of strike action in January and February. The trust was consulting on staff cuts because it had a multimillion-pound hole in its budget, a hole that senior leaders put down to a mistake in the finances. I am glad that there is now new leadership in place at the Arthur Terry learning partnership, but what steps can our Government take to ensure that trusts are held to account much more strongly than they currently are?

[Georgia Gould]

I really appreciate the way in which my hon. Friend has been working closely with me on this issue. The Department sets clear financial management expectations for trusts through funding agreements in the academy trust handbook, and we are bringing in inspections of multi-academy trusts to ensure good governance and financial management.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

[Claire Hazelgrove (Filton and Bradley Stoke) (Lab)]

T6. I thank the Schools Minister for meeting my constituent Christine Lote to discuss her campaign to see the school admissions code broadened, following her own stage 4 cancer not being factored into her daughter’s primary school allocation, which has seen her placed further from home. Christine cannot walk her daughter to school any more, and her daughter cannot access the specialist bereavement support at the more local school. Will the Minister please confirm whether this change can be considered as part of the admissions code consultation, and whether information about this issue can be shared with other local authorities to inform their policies and help prevent this for other families?

[Georgia Gould]

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s constituent, whose courage, commitment and care for others in the most impossible circumstances is truly inspiring. In the schools White Paper, we committed to consulting on changes to the school admissions code to promote fairness for all families. As part of that work, we will be looking at how to ensure that cases such as this are better supported through admissions policy in the future and, in the meantime, that schools and admissions authorities make use of the social and medical criteria.

[Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)]

T3. In 2023, Parliament legislated to protect freedom of speech on our university campuses, but we are still waiting for the Government to bring section 8 of the Act into force, so will the Minister set out a clear timetable for commencing the complaints scheme to ensure that our academics are protected from censorship and silencing?

--- Later in debate ---

[Georgia Gould]

Children and young people often say to me that financial education is the big change they want to see in the curriculum. We are pleased that we are making that change as part of the curriculum and assessment review and including financial education at primary and secondary level. We are developing a new digital national curriculum to make things easier for teachers, and we are increasing funding for schools to implement these wider changes.

[Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)]

Scottish colleges are struggling to cope with huge cuts to staff and funding, including West College Scotland in my constituency. The Scottish National party has cut funding by 20% in five years. What can the Minister do, working with other Departments such as Defence, to ensure that Scottish colleges become engines of growth and opportunity again, particularly for the young people of West Dunbartonshire?

[Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Reform)]

Does the Secretary of State agree that we should prioritise the promotion of British heritage in schools? If so, will she bring in a policy to ensure that every school flies the Union Jack outside its premises, and that a different pupil gets the chance to raise the national flag every morning?

[Georgia Gould]

We already teach British values, and we are proud to teach our British heritage and our past to set us up for the future.

[Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)]

Given that this is Colleges Week, may I take the opportunity to mention Stafford college, which is widely accepted to be the best college in the country? It already has 1,150 students on manufacturing courses, and works with 250 local employers in the sector. Does the Minister agree that if Newcastle and Stafford Colleges Group were made an advanced manufacturing technical excellence college, it could build on its excellent relationship with manufacturers locally?

--- Later in debate ---

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

I welcome the Education Secretary’s commitment to inclusion, but many children in York are not in school because of the disciplinary processes run by multi-academy trusts and the culture that ensues. What will she do to ensure that leaders in such trusts are held to account for that?

[Georgia Gould]

We think it is absolutely essential for all children to have access to an inclusive education. That is why Ofsted is now inspecting inclusion in all schools. As part of the schools White Paper and the special educational needs and disabilities consultation, we have set out new guidance on reasonable adjustments to support schools with that, and we will inspect multi-academy trusts on their decision-making.

[Suella Braverman (Fareham and Waterlooville) (Reform)]

Disgracefully, a pro-ayatollah students’ society plans to host a commemorative event on the campus of University College London in the name of “the fallen”—in other words, in support of those who backed the brutal regime of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Does the Secretary of State agree that it is utterly wrong that taxpayer-funded university resources are being used to propagate the murderous ideology of the Tehran regime, which has attacked UK bases, and with which we are effectively at war?

Young Children’s Screen Time

Georgia Gould Excerpts

Tuesday 10th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for York Outer (Mr Charters) for his really powerful and heartfelt speech.

So much of what my hon. Friend set out today really resonated with me as the mum of a two-year-old. It can be a struggle to stay off the phone, and I would not really like to consider my own screen time, so it was brave of him to do so. He also spoke about the need to be present, the importance of messy outdoor play and the need for children to have protected childhoods, as well as how difficult it is to navigate this whole new world and, as a parent, to find the best advice and the right thing to do for our children. That is why debates such as this are so important, and why his leadership as a parent in this place is so critical. As he said, we want to harness the benefits of technology for education, but we want to protect children from harm.

Before I go into questions on screen time, I want to reflect on what my hon. Friend and the hon. Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) said about opportunities in childhood—the need to have good youth services and opportunities for children to play, to be in sports activities and to perform. That is why, as the Minister for School Standards, I am focused on the enrichment opportunities around school, such as outdoor learning, music performance, the opportunity to be in a sports team—those are the things that give joy to the school experience and to young people’s childhoods.

[Anna Dixon]

I am sure that the Minister is aware that it is the National Year of Reading. On the wider opportunities to get our kids off their screens, would she commend the work of the National Literacy Trust in trying to restore the joy of reading, and perhaps share her favourite childhood book with us? Mine was “The Very Hungry Caterpillar”.

[Georgia Gould]

My next sentence was going to be about the National Year of Reading. I have been travelling around the country visiting schools and it has been wonderful to see how they are embracing it. I have been hearing about schools putting on pyjama parties for parents and children to read together, and I have been at schools when parents have come in to read with children. That brings the joy of reading to life, and I hope that we will see a similar experience to Australia with bookshops full of children embracing reading. At the moment, my son is obsessed with the “Mog” series, so all we do in my house is talk about Mog.

I recognise the concerns that my hon. Friend the Member for York Outer raised about the impact of screen time on young children. Early childhood is developmentally critical and screen time can displace healthy behaviours such as physical activity and adequate sleep, which have complex interactions with mental health and wellbeing.

[Alex Mayer (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab)]

I recently did a survey with local schools. Perhaps the children were more willing to put on the survey how much screen time they had when they were not supervised by their parents, but I was enthused about the things that they said they would do if they were not on social media, including spending far more time outdoors and reading, as has already been mentioned. Does the Minister agree that we need evidence, so we are not doing just what is simple but what is right?

[Georgia Gould]

Absolutely. Evidence is so important because this is a struggle. It is not about judging parents, but about giving them the best evidence and the tools that they need to make decisions to support their children.

[Adam Dance]

I thank the Minister, as always, for replying to me. Only 18% of dyslexics have access to assistive technology. I know that she is passionate about getting that changed, so are we on the right road to get more assistive technology into our education system for dyslexics?

[Georgia Gould]

Absolutely. We are really committed to supporting assistive technology. We have introduced new lending libraries, as the hon. Member is aware, and we recently announced a £200 million investment into teacher training. As part of that training, we want to look at how we can best use assistive technology in the classroom, as well as what we are doing around edtech and how we are growing its use in the classroom. That shows that technology can be helpful when it is supporting learning, and it is important to take a nuanced approach.

From recent Government research, we know that the children with the highest screen use—of around five hours daily—at age two can say significantly fewer words than those with lower use. My hon. Friend the Member for York Outer referred to research that said that 98% of two-year-olds watch a screen daily. As my hon. Friend the Member for Darlington (Lola McEvoy) set out, it is critical that parents have the right information to be able to support their children.

That is why we announced in January the first ever Government guidance for parents on screen use for under-fives, which aims to provide practical, non-judgmental advice to help parents balance screen use with activities that support children’s development such as playing, speaking and reading. Parents want that guidance. Parents in this Chamber want it, and polling from Kindred shows that 40% of parents say that reducing screen time would help ensure their child is ready for reception, underlining the demand for practical, trusted guidance in the early years.

I, therefore, recognise the significance of the issue and the responsibility to get it right. For that reason, we have set up the early years screen time advisory group, a new expert panel chaired by Professor Russell Viner—former chief scientific adviser to the Department for Education, leading paediatrician and expert in children’s health—and Dame Rachel de Souza, the Children’s Commissioner for England.

The early years screen time advisory group will review the current evidence and existing advice on early years screen use to help inform the new guidance for parents. That group is holding its second meeting as we speak, which shows the urgency and seriousness with which the work is being taken forward. We want to hear directly from those with relevant knowledge and experience. We launched a two-week call for evidence on 2 February to ensure that the guidance is firmly grounded in evidence and expertise. I encourage hon. Members to share their evidence. My hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) mentioned work being done in Bradford, which I encourage her to share.

[Lola McEvoy]

The Minister is giving a brilliant speech to sum up this important debate. Will the work she mentions consider the link between the need for more speech and language therapy for early years and screen time pre-school?

[Georgia Gould]

We want to look at the evidence, including any impact on speech and language. We are seeing a far greater need for speech and language support, which is why we are investing in new early years support around speech and language. That is surely one of the areas that the evidence will address.

Engagement sessions with parents, children, early years practitioners and stakeholders are taking place across England, allowing them to share what works in real family life, and what support they need from guidance. The guidance will be published in April and made available to parents through the Best Start in Life website, giving the clarity and support they are asking for to navigate screen time with their youngest children.

More broadly, my hon. Friend the Member for Swindon North (Will Stone) raised the issue of protecting children from harmful content. The Online Safety Act 2023 requires providers specifically to consider, as part of their risk assessment, how algorithms could impact children’s exposure to illegal content and content that is harmful to children on their service. Services that are assessed as easily accessed by children must put in place measures to prevent algorithms from pushing harmful content to children.

As we heard from my hon. Friend the Member for York Outer, there is a wider consultation—a national conversation—that will look at some of the broader issues. The Department for Education is committed to strengthening the evidence base on the impact of screen use and screen time on child development. Our set of longitudinal studies already gathers data on children’s screen and social media use, and will interrogate their relationship with mental health and cognitive development. We are funding a programme of research to better understand the impact of digital technologies on children.

We are in strong agreement with the overwhelming message from today: we cannot wait to act in this space. We have to look to protect and enhance our children’s lives online. It is right to continue to look at further action that could be taken, so I welcome today’s important debate. We will set out guidance, but it is important to have the national conversation, without blaming parents, to make sure that they have the information they need. When they want to get out and enjoy time with their children, we should provide the right activities and support to enable them to do so.

Question put and agreed to.