Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Laura Trott]

The rise of social media really came about in a serious way in 2015 or 2016 with the rise of front-facing cameras. We took action through the Online Safety Act 2023, which was a huge Act in pushing forward the safety of children, but it has not been effective in policing content. It has not been enough, and we need to go further. We now need a social media ban for children.

Let me say once more: I will not give up this fight until the Government tell the House what they will do and by when. I hope that that comes tonight—the Minister indicates that it may come later in the other place—but I will not give up, and neither will the thousands of people who have joined the brilliant “Raise the Age” campaign, which has been speaking so powerfully for frustrated parents across the country.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

The shadow Minister is absolutely right. The inboxes of all Members across the House have been filled by parents who feel passionately that they need help to be able to control their children’s use of things online. They need the Government to step in and say, “You are actually not allowed those apps.” I am a parent myself, with young children, and as parents we cannot be over their shoulder all the time watching what they are seeing online. We know that what they are being given by the algorithm is so unsafe, damaging and harmful, and they deserve to be protected from that by the Government.

[Laura Trott]

The hon. Lady is absolutely right. What she says speaks to the point that our two parties have been able to come together in the interests of children; it is just the Labour party that is standing in the way.

Frankly, I know that there are Labour Members who agree with us and who want the Government to stop promising action and actually start taking some. Given the events of this week, I suspect that many of them do not even trust a word their own Government say. [Interruption.] It is absurd that the Government continually promise urgent action, yet all they have laid before Parliament is an amendment that does not commit to any action at all and does not specify a timeframe. This is not good enough. In a terrible week for the Government, the Opposition have proved that politicians can make change by coming together in the interests of children to ban smartphones. We can do the same on social media. The Prime Minister has already made his Back Benchers defend the indefensible this week, and I urge Labour MPs not to let him do the same to them again and to vote for change this evening. We owe it to the generation of children who are being exposed to extreme and violent content every single day to do so.

Childhood is short, and children are being influenced and impacted by what they are being exposed to right now. Damage is being done now, and months and even years of delay mean a childhood lost for some, because once that content is seen, it cannot be unseen. Once those pressures take hold, they cannot simply be reversed, and the consequences can last a lifetime. This is not about action at some point in the future; it is about whether we act while there is still time to protect children who are growing up today, not years from now. Childhood is short, and we cannot give it back to children later, so we must protect it now.

--- Later in debate ---

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

First, I welcome the Government’s decision to introduce a statutory ban on mobile phones in schools. I appreciate that the guidance previously proposed was clear and that schools must take account of Government guidance, but where an issue is unequivocal—and I think the need for mobile phones to be absent from schools unless there is a clear need for an exception is unequivocal—putting the matter into legislation is the most straightforward way to ensure compliance, and it provides clarity for the public.

However, what approach will the Minister take to the guidance accompanying this ban, particularly with regard to exceptions? There will be children who still need to have a phone in school for a variety of different reasons—for example, because they are young carers or because they rely on phone-enabled software for support with a disability or special educational need. At the Education Committee yesterday, one of our witnesses made an important point about how exceptions are to be treated when implementing a ban, which was that care needs to be taken regarding how the wider issues in the classroom are managed for children who have an exceptional need for a phone. Those issues include who gets to use the phone, what apps are allowed to be on that phone, and how children are kept safe from bullying in this context.

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

Chichester high school in my constituency has introduced Yondr pouches—I imagine there are many similar pouches. Children can take their phones to school, but then they have to put them in those lockable pouches. They do not have access to them throughout the day, and they can unlock the pouches when they leave school. Does the hon. Lady agree that that is a potential solution, especially for children who need their phones for health reasons or who, for other reasons, need their devices to make sure they can be in school?

SEND Provision and Reform

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Monday 13th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Chris Coghlan (Dorking and Horley) (LD)]

I first want to address the comments from the right hon. Member for Salisbury (John Glen). I have enormous respect for him, but his underlying argument is flawed, because there is the same number of SEND children now as there was in 2010 and in 1978. The question is why the number fell so much up to 2016 and then rose, and I would suggest that the answer probably has something to do with the scrapping of Sure Start by my party and his, but that is for another day.

One month ago a SEN dad messaged me on Facebook about his autistic son, who has been out of school for seven years, with his tribunal delayed three times. He said that his son will now be out of education and employment for the rest of his life. He said that his son had been “left to rot” by his local authority and the NHS. I wrote to him to say how sorry I was. I suggested how he could get help and put him in touch with his MP, but then two weeks ago he wrote to me again. He said:

“My son is very unwell, and I can no longer carry on. I am mentally and physically exhausted, and I am electing to end my life. I intend to find peace. I simply cannot continue, and I refuse to see my son deteriorate further. There will be no one to care for him, so now the NHS will have to care for my son.”

We called 999 immediately, and the emergency services sent an ambulance.

We have seen too many families like this. I presented to the Government and published in The Times evidence that hundreds of SEND children are avoidably killing themselves due to public authority negligence. ITV has published evidence of misconduct and law breaking on SEND by 117 local authorities. I believe that the Government are serious about SEND reform, and I am grateful to the Minister for coming to Dorking tomorrow to meet Surrey SEND families, but family after family has testified to me that the legal rights that the Government are seeking to reduce can be the difference between life and death.

When a council officer determines that a child does not need an EHCP when they know that that child does in fact need an EHCP, that is serious misconduct. We know that this is happening on a massive scale because families win the resulting tribunals 98% of the time. Councils are betting that they can save money because the families are too exhausted to take them to tribunal. Children are killing themselves as a result.

Under-resourcing is no excuse.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

My hon. Friend mentions under-resourcing. At West Sussex county council, the department just put an answerphone message on its system saying, “We are overwhelmed. We cannot take any calls today.” Does he agree that the parents who are navigating the system and often describe it as a “fight” do not have the opportunity just to put their answerphone on or not show up for their kids that day because they are overwhelmed, and that we need to do far more for them?

[Chris Coghlan]

I entirely agree. An under-resourced officer can still determine need, still issue an EHCP and still be transparent about what cannot yet be delivered. That, at least, is honest.

I know that many council officers do the right thing, but when a council officer commits misconduct that results in an avoidable death, why are they not criminally prosecuted? Here we are, with pervasive local authority law breaking, hundreds of children avoidably killing themselves, and a Government who plan to cut the rights that can save their lives.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jen Craft]

We provide for it by meeting need at the earliest opportunity. It is about addressing it before it reaches crisis point, unlike the situation we are in now. We would not do this for any other condition. We would not say, “There are too many people out there with cancer—we should stop diagnosing cancer.” It would not work like that. We do not turn around and say, “Too many people are presenting a need”—we meet it. Imagine if we addressed the education system as a whole like we address SEND education—as a problem to be solved and not an opportunity that exists to create young people who are willing, equipped and able to go out into the world and shape our future society and our world. Why do we not see that opportunity for SEND children, as we do for the wider school population?

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

Does the hon. Lady agree that there is so much untapped potential in the parents who are currently trapped at home trying to support their children who are not being supported into schools? When I hosted a recent roundtable with parents in my constituency, I met ex-teachers, teaching assistants and educational psychologists, and none of them are at work because they are not being supported.

[Jen Craft]

I agree 100%. We could work out the lifetime cost of a parent being out of work to care for their child who should be in education or in a suitable school, or even the cost of a parent having to draw back from working a certain amount of hours or from reaching where they could go in their career because of the stress that the system puts on them. That leads to some of the concerns I have with the White Paper.

This White Paper has to work—I want to start from that basis—for families like mine, for people who are struggling and for people who see the current system as failing them. It has to work, and it is in danger of not working on a few points. No. 1 is trust, which I mentioned. The second one is the workforce. That cannot be solved by the Department for Education on its own. A crucial part of that workforce comes from the Department of Health and Social Care. The Secretary of State for Health must publish a statement on how he will deliver the SEND workforce, particularly the paediatric allied healthcare workforce. Otherwise, I am sorry to say that this plan will struggle to get off the ground.

Finally, if there is one thing that can be brought to this plan that will change how the system works and the stress and strain it puts on parents, it is support for parents. Quite often, parents feel like they are under attack. If your child receives a diagnosis of SEND, you feel like your parenting method, who you are and the benefits you bring to your family are constantly questioned, and you do not know where to go for support. If we can support parents to implement the same intervention measures at home, as well as giving them the respite they need and the support to know they are not alone and to be able to properly support their child through education, this White Paper can truly deliver on the promise it holds.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Monday 2nd March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank my hon. Friend for his excellent support for the schools in his constituency. Lockable pouches are being used successfully by many schools and are listed in the Department’s examples of best practice approaches. Heads can rightly choose how they implement the mobile phone ban in their school to reflect what works best in context.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

Last week, I spent time with teachers and students from Chichester high school who have implemented the use of lockable magnetic pouches. Students told me that this had improved their focus in lessons and, interestingly, that the number of bathroom breaks had halved. Their use has reduced the pull of the addictive features on phones, and teachers report that children are just being children at break times rather than being glued to their phones. I am glad that the Minister shares my ambition to see every school become phone free, but what support are the Government going to provide for schools that have really tight budget restrictions to enable them to achieve this?

[Olivia Bailey]

I congratulate the pupils and staff at Chichester high school on their great work in this space. It is fantastic to hear that the policy they are implementing is making a difference for the children. Phones should not be in schools, and we are going to be working with schools through our attendance and behaviour hubs, along with our toughened guidance, to make sure we support them to implement this policy properly.

Student Loan Repayment Plans

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Wednesday 25th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jas Athwal]

I absolutely agree. This is so important, which is why we are here to look at the system.

Interest accrues from the moment the first payment is made, and it is linked to RPI, with the current maximum rate of 6.2%. Here is the stark reality: in 2024-25, plan 2 loans accrued £12.6 billion in interest, while borrowers repaid just £2.8 billion. In a single year, interest added to balances was more than four times the amount repaid. That is not a slogan but official data.

When graduates open their statements and see their balances rising, despite working hard and repaying every month, their anger is not ideological—it is rational. Students finishing university in 2024 entered repayment with an average debt of £53,000. That is the price tag now attached to aspiration. That burden falls unevenly, as those from wealthier families often avoid large maintenance borrowing and high earners quickly clear balances and reduce interest exposure. But the vast majority of middle earners—our nurses, teachers, engineers and small business employees—repay for decades, and most will never clear the balance.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that this issue disproportionately affects women and those who have caring responsibilities? I have a constituent who was successfully paying down her student loan. She took a few years off to have children, and when she came back to the employed world, her bill was bigger than when she left university, so the starting point was higher. She knows that she will be paying it off until she retires. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that that is an unacceptable situation to be in?

[Jas Athwal]

The hon. Lady makes a valid point. I wholeheartedly agree that the system is rigged against working women who take time out to have children, so we need to make it fairer.

A graduate constituent of mine told me that she was the first woman in her entire lineage to go to university and get a degree, but she feels that that proud moment in her family’s history has been taken away from her by the regret that she has accrued a huge debt. The issue is not an isolated to Ilford South. As we hear from hon. Members across the Chamber, all across the country a whole generation feels bled dry by a system that keeps taking from them.

Another constituent told me that he left university with £64,000 of debt. Four years of repayment later, he now owes more than £99,000. This is not shared sacrifice, but a structural imbalance. We often speak of aspiration, but aspiration cannot thrive under compound interest designed in Whitehall. The repayment threshold sits only a few thousand pounds above the full-time minimum wage. Repayments begin early, just as graduates are finding their feet. People face income tax, national insurance, pension contributions, council tax and rent or, for those who are fortunate enough, a mortgage—and then we add 9%. For many, this does not feel like a loan; it functions as a long-term graduate tax, but without the honesty of calling it one.

From April 2027, the repayment threshold is scheduled to be frozen for three years. Freezing thresholds during wage growth means that more income falls into repayment. It increases lifetime contributions and tightens the squeeze on those who are already stretched. Yes, it improves Treasury forecasts, but is that really the motivation? Fairness is not measured only by spreadsheets. Outstanding student loan balances are projected to reach £500 billion in today’s prices by the mid-2040s.

Creative Education

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Tuesday 9th December 2025 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart.

I am hugely grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) for opening this valuable debate on creative education and for his thoughtful suggestions and campaign work. I also thank other colleagues for their contributions, which have included interesting comments about outdoor education and the importance of community-based arts organisations. I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Reading Central (Matt Rodda) for his campaign work on Reading Gaol, and my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud for his campaign on musical instruments. The Government have invested £25 million in the last year on funding for musical instruments, and I will say more on that later. Finally, the hon. Member for Leicester South (Shockat Adam) reminded us of the benefits of the arts to the wider curriculum.

My hon. Friend the Member for Stroud is a great advocate for creative education, especially music. I understand that he is a keen flautist. I attempted to play the violin and viola at school, but I suspect that the joys of playing music were felt only by me, and not by anyone forced to endure my performances. None the less, music education gave me, like so many children and young people, a chance to build confidence, make friends and explore my creativity—although I would rather forget my rockstar phase, even if I maintain that Standard Deviation was a great name for a band.

The Government are clear: high-quality arts education must not be the preserve of the privileged few. Arts subjects are important pillars of the rounded and enriching education that every child deserves. As my hon. Friend highlighted, creative education also benefits children’s wellbeing.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

Will the Minister give way?

[Olivia Bailey]

Very briefly. I cannot take too many interventions because I am short on time.

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

Does the Minister agree that a creative arts education opens up multiple opportunities and careers for young people that do not necessarily involve being on a stage or creating music? The creative industries need intelligent engineers to make the lights and sound work, so a creative education can open many doors to exciting careers in the creative industries.

[Olivia Bailey]

I agree entirely with the hon. Lady. The creative industries unlock so many skills for the wider economy.

My hon. Friend the Member for Stroud spoke powerfully about the important subject of children’s mental health. We are providing access to specialist mental health professionals in every school, so that every child and young person can access early support. Schools can also play a vital role by promoting good mental wellbeing and providing effective early support to pupils who may be struggling, and we are clear that creative activities can be part of their approach. For example, our targeted support toolkit gives education staff guidance on the use of creative and arts therapies to support pupils’ emotional wellbeing.

Access to the arts starts with the curriculum, as was rightly said. All young people should have the same opportunities that my hon. Friend and I did to develop their creativity and to find their voice. That is why one of our first actions in government was to launch an independent curriculum and assessment review. We will improve the arts curriculum through clear and rigorous programmes of study for music, art and design, and strengthened curriculum content for dance in physical education and drama in English. We are legislating so that academies will be required to teach the reformed national curriculum, including arts subjects, ensuring that creative education is not subject to a postcode lottery.

However, curriculum reform alone will not be enough to ensure that all children have access to a high-quality arts education; we also need to support our schools and our teachers. That is why in March we announced our intention to launch a new national centre for arts and music education. I am pleased to give my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud the additional detail that he requested: this new centre will help us to support schools in the teaching of music, art and design, drama and dance, and our intention is to establish it by September 2026, appointing a delivery partner for the centre through an open competitive procurement that we will issue in the new year.

The centre will also be the national delivery partner for the 43 music hub partnerships across England, which offer whole-class ensemble teaching, music instrument tuition and instrument loans, as well as continuing professional development for teachers. This Government continue to support that crucial programme, with grant funding of £76 million secured for this academic year and longer-term funding to be confirmed in due course.

For some pupils, particularly those facing disadvantage and with additional needs, the barriers to accessing music education can be particularly significant. That is why we are investing in a music opportunities pilot, backed by £2 million of Government investment and £3.85 million of funding from Arts Council England and Youth Music, with targeted support for pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds or with special educational needs and disabilities. The pilot offers pupils across primary and secondary schools the opportunity to learn to play an instrument of their choice or to sing to a high standard by providing free lessons.

We also recognise the importance of specialist training in supporting young people to pursue the most advanced levels of arts education, including through means-tested bursaries through the dance and music scheme. That is why this Government continue to provide generous support to help more than 2,000 students access specialist music and dance education, committing £36.5 million for this academic year. Future funding for the scheme will be announced in due course.

In concluding, I would first like to take a moment of the Chamber’s time to pay tribute to the late Michael Harper, a vocal coach and champion of under-represented voices in the arts. Working with institutions such as the Royal Northern College of Music, the Guildhall School of Music and Drama and the English National Opera, Michael was a passionate advocate for music education in every region of the UK. It is people such as Michael and his husband Tony—friends to many of us in Reading and in the Labour party—who recognise the transformational impact that access to the arts can have on children and young people. We remember him fondly.

This Government are committed to ensuring that all children can access and engage with high-quality arts education. I thank, once again, my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud for bringing forward this debate, and all the teachers, volunteers, music trusts and arts education advocates who work tirelessly to give our children a love for the arts. Creative subjects such as art, music, drama and dance are a vital part of a rich, broad school experience and must not be the preserve of a privileged few. While my violin playing was patchy and Standard Deviation never got our big break, I want every child to have the same opportunity to discover their love for the arts.

Question put and agreed to.

Children with SEND: Assessments and Support

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Monday 15th September 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

I thank the Petitions Committee for accepting this debate. The e-petition received over 200 signatures from my constituents in Chichester. It is a pleasure to see the Minister in her place. I put on record thanks from the parental organisations and advocacy organisations, because I know she has reached out and asked to speak to them ahead of the White Paper’s publication, which is really appreciated. Time and again, when talking to parents, teachers and those in local authority about the SEND system, I hear the word “adversarial” and that it is failing to deliver for our young people. Parents often feel pitted against their school, or even against other parents, in a system that is complex to navigate and distressing for all involved.

Where West Sussex county council is concerned, parents report a pattern that has been cited by many Members on both sides of the Chamber today. In the latest quarterly figures, it managed to put in place just 14.3% of all EHCPs within the 20-week statutory framework, which puts it among the worst councils in England on timelines. When an EHCP is refused, even after lengthy assessments, families appeal, then on the eve of the tribunal, the council concedes and issues the plan—but often, that is only the start of the process for those families. It wastes months that a child does not get back, and it wastes public money on process rather than provision.

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

On exactly that point, the problem often starts earlier than that—in schools. My mum, a councillor in Wakefield, has been fighting to get my sister assessed for two years, but the school has lost the paperwork so we are no further forward. Does my hon. Friend agree, similar to what my hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) said, that we need more support in schools to make sure that people get the assessments they need?

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Many schools that I have spoken to in my constituency say they cannot fund a full-time SENCO; instead, they might share them with other primary schools in the area. SENCOs are at the frontline of this issue. They want to deliver for the children they are asked to represent, but they are not paid enough nor given enough hours to do the job. We need decisions that get it right first time and support that starts when the need is identified, not after a courtroom date is set.

I welcome the ten-minute rule Bill tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) on neurodivergent screening and teacher training. His principle is simple: we must identify needs early, including dyslexia; equip teachers with the knowledge and confidence to respond in class; and make specialist pathways clear and timely for those who need them. As he rightly said in his moving contribution in the main Chamber, neurodivergence is not a weakness or a flaw; with the right support, it can be a superpower. If Ministers are serious about addressing the crisis in SEND, parent voice must be at the centre. Parents know their children best and what works, because they live with the consequences of policy every day. Change will command confidence only if families can see and feel the difference.

[Dr Rosena Allin-Khan (in the Chair)]

I am afraid that I have to take the time limit down to one and a half minutes to get everybody in.

Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Thursday 4th September 2025 Westminster Hall

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund.

It is a pleasure to serve under you, Ms Lewell. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting this debate, and I thank hon. Members who supported my application.

The Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund has, since 2015, been a lifeline for families who are raising children who have endured immense hardship and trauma. I welcome the announcement this morning—nicely timed for this debate—that the fund will continue into the next financial year, giving families and providers a little more of a chance to plan and deliver therapy. It is also good news that the Department plans to engage with providers and families during the reform process. That shows that the campaigning of colleagues, families and providers—including those in the Public Gallery for this debate—makes a difference, and shows that we cannot stop now.

But while the extension is welcome, it does not properly address any of the fundamental issues that exist as a result of the cuts announced in April, such as the significant decrease in per child funding, or the lack of a long-term settlement for the fund. The fund was designed to provide children with the therapeutic support that they need to recover from trauma, neglect and abuse. It has enabled outstanding providers, such as Beacon House and Jigsaw in my constituency of Mid Sussex, to deliver life-changing therapy to vulnerable children. The fund also provides vital support to parents such as Rachel, who is here today and who speaks so powerfully about the importance of the fund and the irreversible damage its withdrawal does.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

I put on record my thanks to my hon. Friend for her tireless campaigning on this specific issue, on behalf of us all. Providers such as Beacon House, which also serves my constituency, have been clear that proper assessments are essential; they are not optional extras. Does my hon. Friend agree that cutting funding for those specialist assessments means that therapy risks starting without the foundations needed for long-term healing, which is both clinically unsafe and deeply unfair to the families involved?

[Alison Bennett]

I thank my hon. Friend for her kind words. She is absolutely right. I will address her point in due course.

When I saw Rachel this morning and told her about the one-year renewal of the fund, she told me that she had come out in goosebumps as a result. That is how much this fund matters to adoptive families. I have seen for myself the difference that the fund makes. One parent told me that her gratitude for the ASGSF was immeasurable, and that she would never have been able to be an adoptive parent today without it. She spoke about two professionals whose

“deep understanding, profound compassion and reflective empathy”

had supported her and her children through multiple crises and out the other side. Such stories are not rare. Every year, Adoption UK’s adoption barometer shows consistent results: 85% of families who access the fund say that it makes a positive impact; 94% say that they would use it again. So, yes, it was a relief in April when my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) secured a commitment from the Minister that the fund would continue, but that relief came only after weeks of absolutely unnecessary anxiety. Families were left in limbo, and providers unsure if they could keep going. Even now, huge problems and unanswered questions remain. The profound concern that I am hearing from families, therapists and charities working with adoptive and kinship families is about whether the Government are going to learn from the shambles of the spring and not repeat those mistakes.

Early Education and Childcare

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Thursday 4th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Morgan]

I am very happy to meet my hon. Friend. The 1,000 Best Start family hubs that we have been rolling out across the country will make a huge difference, ensuring that every child gets the best start in life, alongside the parent hub that we launched earlier this week, which will provide practical support to parents on breastfeeding, access to childcare and other issues. I note that no Reform Members are in the House today, and I know the public will note that too.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

I thank the Minister for his statement. Maintained nurseries such as Chichester nursery school provide bespoke support for children, especially those with special educational needs and disabilities, but less than 400 maintained nurseries remain open. Will he outline what steps he is taking to ensure long-term financial stability for those nurseries so that they can keep the lights on and continue supporting the children they care for in their critical early years?

[Stephen Morgan]

We aim to ensure that every child with developmental differences and special educational needs is supported at the start of their life. The hon. Lady will know that we will publish a White Paper on those issues later this year. I commend the work of maintained nurseries; they provide a unique role in communities across the country, and I hope they have a bright future ahead of them in the light of the ambitions we set out in the “best start in life” strategy in July.

Early Years Providers: Government Support

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Wednesday 9th July 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for Sherwood Forest (Michelle Welsh) for securing this important and timely debate—I am sure she intended it to fall in the week when the Secretary of State announced the roll-out of Best Start centres. I also pay tribute to the hon. Lady for her ongoing advocacy for children, parents and early years providers up and down the country, often using her personal experiences to impress the importance of getting this right. Her commitment to the early years is noted across the House. She has also highlighted that early years providers span not just nurseries, but pre-schools, maintained nurseries, childminders, independent nurseries and in-school nurseries as well.

Quality early years education is the single best investment that any Government can make in the future of our society. It supports children’s development at a critical stage of their lives and lays the groundwork for future educational attainment, wellbeing and opportunity. It also matters enormously for families. Flexible and affordable childcare is not just a convenience; it is a vital part of the country’s economic and social infrastructure. With the UK’s statutory parental pay among the lowest in the OECD, parents are often having to choose an early years provider earlier than they might like in order to return to work.

The Government’s plans to expand the 30 hours free childcare entitlement have received broad support across the House, and rightly so. However, I would like to take this opportunity to ask the Minister whether the ambition will be matched with realism. Is he confident that the promise will be delivered? Many providers are already struggling to keep their doors open. In 2023, half of them reported that their income did not cover basic operating costs, and that is before factoring in the Government’s increases to national insurance contributions and the national living wage.

In real terms, the average funding for three to four-year-olds is still below where it was in 2016. While the headlines about expanded entitlement sound impressive, and are no doubt welcome across the country, we have to ask whether it is enough to keep the sector afloat.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

Over the weekend, I was at a village fête. I will not name the primary school, but I was approached by the head, who told me that with the expansion of the number of hours and the rate that they are being paid, the school will close within 18 months. Even though, by the standards of its sector, it had a reasonable buffer going into this, the cost of delivering the service is not matched by Government funding. This village will lose a vital service as a result.

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

My hon. Friend raises a valid and important point that has been made in various contributions to this debate. At the start of this week, I spent my morning at Fishbourne pre-school. It does not have a lovely name like the Bears or the Acorns—I am quite jealous, actually—but it is a brilliant, popular, charity-run pre-school that is doing everything it can to serve local families.

I was covered in shaving foam the moment I walked through the door. There were activities, messy play and free play going on everywhere. We had a lovely “Wind the Bobbin Up” in the forest school, but I also took the opportunity to talk to the manager of the pre-school. She told me very plainly that, under the new arrangements, not only will their funding model be affected, but they will end up taking fewer children overall. The demand is there—they are already at capacity—but this change will mean that they can serve fewer families in the Fishbourne area.

I think that is what my hon. Friend the Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) was alluding to: in those rural areas where there is not a huge amount of choice, and just one local service provider, if they can take on fewer children, where are the others meant to go?

[Caroline Voaden]

My hon. Friend is talking about the provision in rural areas. We have a wonderful nursery called Rainbow nursery in Totnes, which serves not only the town but the wider area. There are very few, if any, village nurseries, so lots of people come into the town to use the nursery provision. It is absolutely rammed, with a huge waiting list, and many parents will not even get a place before their child moves on. As other hon. Members have said, it is really struggling, with the free childcare hours, to cover its costs. If that nursery becomes unsustainable, there will be no provision. There are not lots of alternatives, so we are at a really crucial point.

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

I hope that the Minister hears the message loud and clear from across the House that many service providers are flagging this to us in our constituencies. I send my concern to Rainbow nursery—another great name for a nursery.

Fishbourne pre-school is just about covering wages and keeping the lights on, but there is nothing left over for the things that actually make early years special: the new books, the toys and the equipment to support those additional needs. Anything extra for the pre-school has to be raised by the parents via raffles or voluntary donations.

The staff at Fishbourne pre-school were conscientious, engaged and passionate about the young people who they look after. I could tell that they valued every single one of them. I was really pleased to see that it had recently taken on a male member of staff, which goes back to earlier contributions from hon. Members. The nursery manager told me that it is brilliant to have a male presence in the nursery because so many of those children only see females in nursery settings. He is doing a marvellous job and I commend him for it. He was not in charge of the shaving foam.

These professionals value every single one of the children they look after. Do the Government believe that they are valuing those professionals in the same way? The Department for Education itself has said that we will need 70,000 new childcare places and 35,000 additional staff by this autumn. Those already in the sector report feeling underpaid, overworked and under-recognised, despite the enormous responsibility that they hold looking after the most precious members of our families. If the Government are to recruit 35,000 more people into the early years sector, they need to make it an attractive career path.

The new entitlements from September are meant to support all families, but the current design risks deepening inequality. The Institute for Fiscal Studies estimates that 80% of the families who will benefit earn over £45,000 a year. Just 20% are lower income families. That means that some of the children who would benefit most from early years intervention and education are the least likely to get it. I hope that the Minister is across that.

My party has welcomed the Government’s commitment to increasing the frequency of Ofsted inspections for early years settings to keep children safe. As the hon. Member for Altrincham and Sale West (Mr Rand) mentioned, that is incredibly welcome, but there is concern that the numbers on the floor can be boosted the day before an Ofsted inspection. The tragic case of Gigi Meehan in Cheadle and the horrific abuse uncovered at Twickenham Green nursery are searing reminders of what can happen when safeguarding fails. Gigi’s parents, along with my hon. Friends the Members for Cheadle (Mr Morrison) and for Twickenham (Munira Wilson), have long campaigned for more regular and more robust inspections, as they are a vital part of raising standards and safeguarding children.

Going back to supporting the workforce who are delivering this essential care, we need to invest in proper training, setting clear standards for oversight and ensuring that there is a meaningful career path for nursery staff. Requiring a recognised early years qualification and helping staff to access and complete that training is key to building a confident, skilled workforce and ensuring that every child receives the best possible start. So many Members across the House mentioned SEND; that skilled workforce can identify the additional support that a child may need as they move on towards school.

I will briefly touch on the comments by the Chair of the Select Committee, the hon. Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), on maintained nurseries. I have a maintained nursery in my constituency, which is relaying the same concerns that she raised: it has the additional onus of employing a headteacher and operating like a school, but it cannot access the funding that schools can. The burden and pressure on its balance sheet are huge, and it is at risk of closing, but maintained nurseries have the greatest majority of SEND children. They are doing those early interventions and some incredible work. I was grateful to visit my local maintained nursery.

[Cameron Thomas]

I was a very nervous father when I handed my daughter to the childminder in her early years setting. She was an absolutely fantastic lady called Jade Bamford in Oxfordshire. When calling for SEND training for early years staff, would my hon. Friend call on the Government to incorporate childminders within that?

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

My hon. Friend raises an important point that childminders are quite often the bedrock of early years provision. So often they are the experts, because they have a small cohort of children so they take the time to understand the needs of every single one of those children that they look after, and I praise them for it.

I would like to briefly touch on the comments made by the Secretary of State for Education during her announcement on school readiness, about children needing to have the ability to sit still. I have two children in primary school. Before they started school, the fantastic nursery that they attended and their primary school were in absolute lockstep on what it means to be school ready. Can they put their own coat and shoes on independently? Can they go to the toilet unaided? Can they hold a pencil? Can they recognise their name if it is written out? There was no requirement for them to be able to sit still, especially in reception where so much of the foundation of their education is rooted in play, as the hon. Member for Sherwood Forest spoke about. I know that the Secretary of State is a mother, and I am sure that she recognises that it was a poorly phrased statement, so can the Minister reassure parents across the UK that play will continue to be the bedrock of early years teaching, and that it will continue throughout key stage 1?

We were very pleased to see the Government’s recent announcements on Best Start hubs and early years workforce support. Those are welcome steps, and I know that a Best Start hub will be really welcomed in my constituency of Chichester. It is a real opportunity to ensure that families have access to all those support networks under one roof.

I will close by asking the Minister a couple of questions. Will he tell us whether the Department will urgently review the funding rates to ensure that they reflect the true cost of delivering early years education, especially in the light of rising staffing and operational costs? Will the Government please consider exempting early years providers from the recent national insurance increase, given the unique pressures facing the sector? What steps are being taken to ensure that the roll-out in September does not leave providers short-staffed and under-resourced? How will the Department support those that are already warning that they may not be able to meet demand?

[Mark Pritchard (in the Chair)]

I will give an extra two minutes to the shadow Minister if she wants them, given that we have a little bit of time.

Adoption and Kinship Placements

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Tuesday 20th May 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. I thank the hon. Member for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith) for securing this important and timely debate. As a member of the all-party parliamentary group on kinship care, I will focus on how vital kinship carers are and on how they are often overlooked and under-supported. Many do not even identify as kinship carers, yet they are the ones providing stability, safety and love to children who can no longer live with their birth parents. Often, they are grandparents, aunts, uncles or family friends; they do this for the love of the children, and often of the families the children can no longer be with, yet kinship carers need proper support to avoid these arrangements breaking down.

In a 2024 survey, 35% of kinship carers rated the information they received from their local authority as very poor, while 44% said they did not trust their local authority at all. They are exhausted by being forced to battle a system that should be supporting them. Many are navigating complex traumas on top of a failing special educational needs and disability system, with half of children in kinship care also not getting the help they need in their education setting. Families also face a cliff edge of support when the young person turns 18.

That is why the adoption and special guardianship support fund—a pot that kinship carers have been able to access only since 2023—is so crucial to getting the bespoke therapies that these children and their trusted adults rely on. In my Chichester constituency, we are lucky to have Beacon House, which is a truly outstanding therapeutic service for young people, families and adults. I will share some of the comments from the children who have had the support of Beacon House. One said:

“It has helped me to understand why I sometimes act the way I do in scenarios and to unload my day to day worries that perhaps were taking a toll on my mental health”.

Another said:

“It’s made me feel safer. It doesn’t make me feel I’m not welcome here”.

And finally:

“It has helped me to think about why I do things and help to understand and for my parents to understand too”.

For so many of the families using services like Beacon House, the adoption and special guardianship support fund has been a lifeline. It benefited more than 18,000 children last year. I believe that the Government know this fund is vital to families up and down the UK, and I understand their desire to increase its availability so that more families can benefit, but the fund is preventing breakdowns in adoptions and special guardianship arrangements. Will the Minister make the argument to the Treasury for increasing the fund, so that all children under care arrangements can access this support, with proper clinical assessments funded so the support can be tailored? These families do extraordinary things, stepping in, often at a moment’s notice, to give vulnerable children a future. The least we can do is give them the support they deserve.