Universities: Funding and Employment

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd April 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Mr Vickers, you are very kind to give me the challenge of four minutes; it will probably be an eight-minute speech in four minutes. I thank the hon. Member for Bedford (Mohammad Yasin) for setting the scene so very well and for providing lots of detail and information.

I wish to give a Northern Ireland perspective. We witness hundreds of students going to different areas in the UK to study. There is no doubt that the financial stability of our higher education facilities is important, so it is vital that we are here to discuss it.

As in many other areas, Northern Ireland has a different set of guidelines when it comes to higher education. Our approach is distinctive, because we have oversight from a Government Department: the Department for the Economy. In the 2012-13 financial year, the combined income of higher education institutions in Northern Ireland was approximately £502.9 million. Fast forward to 2023, and Queen’s University—Northern Ireland’s primary education facility—reported a total income of £474.2 million. I thank Queen’s University and Ulster University for the partnerships they have and for trying to find cures for some of the great diseases and problems, including heart disease, diabetes, cancer, cardiac arrest and eyesight issues.

Furthermore, there are growing concerns about the higher education sector’s reliance on international tuition fees. The House of Commons Public Accounts Committee has warned that higher education providers are potentially exposing themselves to significant financial risks if future growth in international student numbers is not high as they expect or had hoped. For example, Ulster University back home in Northern Ireland did experience increases in income, with tuition fees from international students rising by more than 50% in the 2021-22 financial year, reaching some £12 million.

Although it is understood that we cater for and are generous in welcoming international students, as we should be, when I spoke to students in my constituency it became clear that many are put off going to England, Scotland and even Northern Ireland for university placements because of the intense tuition costs. Yes, universities rely on fees to deliver fantastic programmes across the board for lots of people, and they train our young ones for the future to get them the jobs that will help the economy to grow, but it is no secret that the levels of tuition fees are extortionate, and they will have to be paid back.

In addition, it is worrying that one in five graduates, or around 70,000 students a year, would have been financially better off if they had not gone to university. That tells me that many students will ask whether they should go to university or get a job and not have a debt to pay back in the future. That is a worrying statistic that we cannot ignore. I seek the Minister’s thoughts on how that can be addressed.

There is a parallel between supporting students and supporting our wonderful universities. There is always a balance to be found, and we need to get that right. Universities can use partnerships with businesses to try to find cures to the world’s diseases, which Queen’s University and Ulster University both do, along with others across this great United Kingdom.

If we allow our universities to suffer financially, they will face challenges such as reduced funding for academic programmes, limited grants and diminished support. Although we must encourage students to attend universities and pursue their dreams, the facilities must be financially supported to allow that to happen.

I look forward to hearing from the Minister, and I have a request. There will never be a debate when I do not ask for something, but I ask in a respectful way. In future, will the Minister ensure that we engage collectively as a nation, despite our having different guidelines, so that universities and jobs are protected and all our students are supported?

Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 1st April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Janet Daby]

This Government absolutely support this fund and this funding being made available. If the hon. Member would like to share any more information regarding the 15-year-old and the family’s experience of lack of support, I would welcome him to do so.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for her answers to the urgent question—no one can doubt her compassion or understanding, given the way she has answered. I am mindful of the fact that children are our future—as a grandfather of six, I understand only too well what it means to have them there—but 18,000 children are left in limbo throughout every region of the United Kingdom, and to get to the point where there is no confirmation of whether essential therapy can continue is terribly disheartening, to say the least. These children feel abandoned. How will the Minister ensure that the lack of a decision, and the hesitation, will not add to their sense of abandonment?

[Janet Daby]

I congratulate the hon. Member on being a grandfather of six, and I hear the concerns he has raised. I share those concerns, and the Government will continue to work to ensure that the support services are in place for all children who need it, including those who are involved with this funding.

Relationship Education in Schools

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 1st April 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy, for the third time this afternoon—we are on a roll here. I commend the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) for securing this debate, on a subject that can be quite difficult—I think that is a fair way of putting it. I will give a parental perspective. The hon. Member and I are not in opposition to each other, but I want to put my view on record.

I am pleased to represent the case for Northern Ireland—I understand that my hon. Friend the Member for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart) will do something similar—and parents who want to have a say on what their children are taught in school. My contribution will be about the importance of parental rights. Many Members will be aware that there has been a shift in the content that schools teach and that is approved by boards of governors, who should be allowed to ensure that RSE in taught in line with community values. There should be a commitment to best practice and good relations between parents and teachers. That always has to be there, and is a key issue in schools.

Such commitment is found at Victoria primary school in Newtownards, in my constituency of Strangford, where parents were brought to an open night, the evening before teaching was to take place with the children, to allow interested parents to know the way in which sensitive topics would be taught, and give them tools that could help them to follow up with their child afterwards. I felt that was a constructive and positive way forward.

I am pleased to see the Minister in her place. She always tries to reassure us, and I seek such reassurance in her response. The sensitive approach that I described was welcomed by parents, and speaks well of a school that looks at education holistically, including home life, which is part of who we are. There is no doubt that teachers play a central role in helping children to grow into successful adults who are equipped with the skills that they need to be safe in a fast-moving world. It is a much faster world than the one in which I was brought up, but I am of a certain age, so people will probably understand that.

Some of the most contentious issues will be taught in RSE. I believe that parents have every right to exercise their authority over what they deem safe and appropriate for their children to be taught. I am putting the marker down clearly for parents, on behalf of their children. There are issues of a personal nature and matters of morality, and it is best left to parents to decide how to raise their children. Their input into this process must be critical. It is not for the state to decide the morality and standards of each family in the United Kingdom. I say that with respect to people. I want to be quite clear: we understand that parents raise children differently. I may disagree with others about what they choose to teach their children, but this is a democratic society, where all values must be respected, no matter how much we disagree with them, in order to uphold freedom of conscience and religion.

There is a blurry line between relationships education and sex education but I will always be a voice for parents, and for them to deem what is appropriate for their child to be taught in school. There must be regulation to ensure that, should a school decide to implement changes to RSE, a parent has a right to withdraw their child, if it is going the wrong way and the parents do not like it. I put that marker down as well.

I urge the Government not to push forward any changes that would diminish parental authority and control. I ask the Minister to continue to speak with her counterparts in the devolved nations to ensure that parents who are genuinely seeking to safeguard their children are afforded respect, in terms of the classroom syllabus, and have their rights to reasonably held views protected. Parental rights, first and foremost.

Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Bill [Lords]

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Report stage
Monday 31st March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

In the past, the hon. Gentleman has mentioned the construction sector. We welcome the news that the Government will build 1.3 million houses, but that requires builders, plumbers, carpenters, electricians and plasterers, and they must be trained, so that they can do that job well. Does he feel that his new clause will enable the building of those 1.3 million houses?

[Ian Sollom]

I would hope that better scrutiny and accountability in Parliament would help with delivering what is required, and holding the Government to account when it comes to keeping their promises.

On the cross-departmental work that I mentioned, the lack of a published framework for Skills England as we consider the Bill is deeply concerning, and what we have seen so far suggests a structure that is heavily Department for Education-centric. Without statutory independence and appropriate seniority, Skills England will struggle to drive the cross-departmental co-ordination that Members on both sides of the House agree our skills system needs.

Resettlement of Ukrainians: Coatbridge

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 26th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Frank McNally (Coatbridge and Bellshill) (Lab)]

It is a privilege to bring the resettlement of Ukrainians in Coatbridge to the House this evening.

We recently recognised the third anniversary of Russia’s barbaric and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine and the House has rightly been united in its condemnation of Putin and his illegal actions. As has been referenced often in the House, both the current and previous Governments, devolved Governments and local authorities stepped up to support Ukraine, as did ordinary people who engaged in extraordinary acts of kindness towards those forced to flee from their homes and seek refuge. I will focus much of my remarks on the efforts in my constituency, recognised nationally as an example of great practice. I wholly appreciate, however, that such examples are seen across the country.

It is also important to recognise the presence in the House earlier of a delegation from Bring Kids Back, who are working to return tens of thousands of Ukrainian children who have been abducted by Russian forces. The whole House will stand with them in their ongoing fight, and I commend my hon. Friend the Member for East Renfrewshire (Blair McDougall) for raising that at Prime Minister’s questions.

In June 2022, North Lanarkshire council in partnership with central Government delivered the Warm Scots Welcome programme in my constituency. The council immediately began work to re-provision and renovate 200 empty flats at High Coats in Coatbridge and in Birkshaw tower in Wishaw, in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Motherwell, Wishaw and Carluke (Pamela Nash). Those towers, previously earmarked for demolition, were redeveloped and supported 400 Ukrainians into permanent accommodation. Shortly thereafter, the three “welcome hotels” in North Lanarkshire that were established in the weeks following the invasion were closed. Health and education provision was also arranged for the families, overseen by a cross-agency support network.

I should note that successful integration into the community of Coatbridge is no accident. North Lanarkshire’s resettlement team has effectively supported refugees from crisis areas across the world over many years: from the Congo, Sudan, Syria, Afghanistan and now Ukraine.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for an absolutely superb Adjournment debate, because every one of us can say “Hear, hear” to what he is doing in his constituency. In my constituency, similar things happen. Ballynahinch high school has a class of Ukrainian children with a Ukrainian teacher and Ukrainian classroom assistants. Ukrainians also have employment in Finnebrogue Foods, Mash Direct and Willowbrook Foods. That tells me that we welcome the Ukrainians, as he does in his constituency. I commend him for this debate and say “Hear, hear; well done for helping the Ukrainians.” We are here to help.

[Frank McNally]

The term tireless advocate is often used in the House, and the hon. Gentleman has certainly been a tireless advocate for Ukrainian refugees over many years. I commend him and the work he has done in his constituency and across Parliament.

The resettlement team in North Lanarkshire have worked diligently over many years and it has been commended for its work and recognised with awards from the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the Local Government Chronicle for its efforts.

Supported Internship Provision

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 19th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jodie Gosling (Nuneaton) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered supported internship provision.

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner.

Yesterday, we heard some dreadful statistics about the stifling of the ambition of people with additional needs who would choose to work but face too many barriers and limited opportunities. The most striking statistic that I heard yesterday was that only 1% of people with health issues who have claimed limited capability to work benefits actually return to work.

I know people with significant disabilities who have thrived in truly exceptional and inclusive businesses, such as the King’s Award-winning Nuneaton Signs, which is not only one of the biggest manufacturers of road signs in the country but boasts a workforce of whom an incredible 70% are disabled, including those with learning difficulties.

We know that as many as 86% of those with learning difficulties who are not in work would like to be, but workplaces need to make the adjustments that our young people need, and they need to be ready for work. We must break down the barriers, and supported internships are a way to do that, both for those wishing to enter the workforce and for businesses wishing to provide a more inclusive employment offer.

Previously, the Department for Education has recognised the value of supported internships. It provided grants for local authorities and partner organisations to double the number of internships between 2020 and 2025 under the Internships Work consortium.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Lady for securing the debate. She clearly has a heart for her people, including her young people, and I commend her for that. I thank her for getting here on time, too; I am not sure how fast she ran, but well done to her. Does she agree that supported internships provide not simply confidence for our young people, but valuable assistance for businesses, and that more businesses perhaps need to be aware of the potential to recruit skilled permanent staff through a different avenue, offering those staff a different opportunity?

[Jodie Gosling]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention and note that only 23% of businesses have applied for adjustments to accommodate disabled people to enter the workforce. These internships are crucial, and they are a really good, supported way into work.

There are four key principles to the supported internship programme. First, the majority of the intern’s time is spent at the employer’s premises in a work placement, allowing a structured introduction to the work environment. Secondly, alongside their time at the employer, the intern follows a personalised study curriculum, including in key skills such as maths and English, which creates a bespoke package to support young people and enable them to progress into paid employment. Thirdly, a job coach is central to the study programme. They support the young person to access training in line with the national occupational standard for supported employment, and provide crucial support for the employer to make necessary adjustments and reflect on their inclusivity practices.

Free School Meals

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 18th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Dowd. I thank the hon. Member for Eastleigh (Liz Jarvis) for setting the scene and for delivering a debate that is so important to us all.

Obviously, I will give a Northern Ireland perspective. Although Northern Ireland is not the Minister’s responsibility, I know—or at least I think—he appreciates my comments and the perspective I give, which in this case replicates what is happening in the rest of the United Kingdom. I always think it is important to bring that interpretation to these debates, because that hopefully adds to how we do things together in this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and ensures that we do them in a better way. Listening to hon. Members so far, it is evident that there are similarities, despite education being devolved. It is important that there is provision for all children to have a decent, balanced meal while in school. For that reason, I am pleased to be here.

I know that the team of the hon. Member for Liverpool West Derby (Ian Byrne) lost on Sunday, but the premier league is still ahead of him and that is the important one, so he should not worry about the Carabao cup; the premier league means a whole lot more, although the Carabao cup means a lot to Newcastle, because they have not had much success in the past few years.

It is a pleasure to see the Minister in his place, and I look forward to his contribution. He comes to these debates, and indeed to Question Time in the Chamber, to genuinely try to answer our requests, and he always does that in a way that helps me have confidence in what he does and in the relationships he has with the Northern Ireland Assembly and particularly with the Minister there.

I am also pleased to see the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds), in his place. He always brings his knowledge to these debates, and he brings it in a fair way. That adds to our debates, because they are about how to make things better. That is what I always say about the shadow Minister and what he does.

To give some background, free school meals are managed and allocated by the education authority back home, and parents can check their eligibility and apply accordingly. The most recent figures I could get are from 2021, when 98,000 pupils in Northern Ireland were entitled to free school meals. I thank the hon. Members for Liverpool West Derby and for Liverpool Riverside (Kim Johnson) for referring to those in poverty, because a great many are in poverty. There is no doubt that there are children who are eligible but who are not claiming, so more must be done to make parents aware of the criteria. I am keen to see how we can cast the net wider and gather those who should be eligible but who are not applying, whatever their reasons may be.

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

The hon. Gentleman makes a point about those who are eligible. Schoolchildren in my constituency are complaining about bus services in Epsom and Ewell. They cannot get on to some of the buses, which means they are incredibly late for school. That is one of the reasons why they miss the breakfast option. While I welcome the introduction of free breakfast clubs, does the hon. Gentleman agree that free hot lunches are key to helping those who need them most? Those who are not there for breakfast also cannot get lunch. However, if they had a free hot lunch, even if they are late to school, they would still be able to have a hot meal.

[Jim Shannon]

As the hon. Lady says, there will always be children who miss out. How do we bring them into the system? The Minister has, no doubt, listened to her question, and hopefully his answer may be of some help.

In March 2024, the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health revealed that 109,000 children in Northern Ireland were in relative poverty. Given that 97,000 to 98,000 children are receiving free school meals, there could potentially be around 11,400 children eligible for assistance and not claiming, some perhaps for the very reasons that the hon. Member for Eastleigh highlighted. More must be done to recognise that.

Some 89,000 children in Northern Ireland are said to be in absolute poverty, which is awful to think about. What a fine line there is between relative and absolute poverty. However, the fine line means that they either get a meal or do not get a meal, and it is important that they get one. I am being constructive in my questions, and I ask the Minister what we can do to address those issues.

Free school meals are a fantastic way to support parents, and they take a bit of pressure off them. Parents do not want to send their children to school without a meal; they want to make sure their children have a meal and a full stomach. Children’s inquisitive minds work better when they are not worrying about getting fed.

We must remember that our schools promote healthy eating and encourage parents to pack healthy and balanced lunches. While that is a wonderful initiative in principle, the cost of food has risen, as other hon. Members have outlined. The figures are very clear: it is impossible to produce a meal for 69p or 78p, and we need to remember that when it comes to producing helpful and nutritious meals.

[Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. The hon. Gentleman makes an interesting point. However, as a new Member who strongly welcomes the new breakfast club initiative, I point out that in my constituency, like many others, only one in 10 schools currently offers a free breakfast club to children. Many of the schools that do offer one rely on companies such as Greggs, and the generosity of parents and teachers to put on the clubs. While I understand that there may be some kinks in the system as we roll out the early adoption scheme, is it not better that the Government are stepping forward, providing funding and working with teachers and schools, rather than relying on the generosity of private businesses and the teachers themselves?

[Jim Shannon]

The hon. Gentleman is right. I am not here to deliver a bad message to the Minister. I welcome the scheme, because it is a good scheme. Any scheme is a good scheme if it helps.

I was about to mention Greggs, Kellogg’s and other companies that do deals with schools. Just in the past week, Asda and Tesco have come up with pilot schemes across the United Kingdom through which food that is about to expire will be given to certain groups. And schoolchildren are a group that it could be given to.

There is nothing wrong with the food. I am of a certain generation, and in my house, when I was growing up, nothing was ever thrown out—nothing. I mean that. If the potatoes were old, they were roasted. If the cheese had a bit of blue growth around the edge, it was cut off or wiped off and we ate it. It has not done me any harm. I am shortly coming to a significant age, and perhaps those foods helped me live longer.

My point is that we need to take advantage of opportunities, and the pilot schemes set up by Asda and Tesco are opportunities. The hon. Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore) is absolutely right that there are other ways of doing things, but we welcome the Government’s positive initiative—if something is good, it is good; it is never bad just because it was proposed by another party. Let us include it in our agenda.

It is no secret that fresh, healthy food is more expensive than the easier alternative, so providing something at school will benefit so many families—parents want that as well. There have previously been calls to provide free school meals for all children. Many MPs, celebrities and organisations backed the No Child Left Behind campaign to provide universal free school meals. Such initiatives and partnerships could be developed to help us deliver for our children.

There is proof that nourishing and healthy meals support children in performing academically. They have better concentration, better memory and better energy, which boosts their educational performance and increases the likelihood of a successful future. That is what we all want, and it is what the Government and the Minister are aiming for.

The initiative is similar to the free milk scheme, which I am old enough to remember from when I was a boy back in the 1960s. It was launched after world war two and was still going when I was at school, and indeed after that. It was designed to combat malnutrition and ensure that all schoolchildren under the age of 18 had free access to a good source of protein and calcium to aid their diets and growth.

I have spoken on this topic many times in this Chamber, but I want to emphasise its importance. Some pupils with special educational needs thrive on routine and perhaps live by a very strict diet. We have heard about children with special diets, and we should think about how they are catered for. If there were a SEND debate in this Chamber, it would be full because everybody would come along with their stories, and I would add my stories and examples too. Schools need to provide meals that cater to those children’s needs. No child should suffer or be left behind. Will the Minister offer some clarity on the current guidelines on this issue?

The free school meals system is fantastic. The Government’s initiative is fantastic, and nobody here will ever be churlish about it. I have made some constructive suggestions for how we can move forward in partnership with businesses such as Greggs, Kellogg’s, Tesco, Asda and others. As I said, there is more to do to recognise all the children and parents who could benefit from this scheme. Furthermore, perhaps the Minister and his Department could consider universal free school meals for the betterment of all children’s futures.

Again, constructively and positively, I look to the Minister to ensure that he has those conversations with the devolved nations—he makes it his business to do that, which is constructive and very welcome—and to ensure that adequate funding is always there to support suffering children and parents who are on the breadline, which makes it difficult for them to cater for and look after their children.

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Monday 17th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Morgan]

I start by thanking all hon. and right hon. Members for their valuable contributions during the passage of the Bill to date, and in particular, members of the Public Bill Committee for providing substantial debate and scrutiny.

The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill is a landmark Bill and a key piece of legislation that will enable us to deliver the Government’s opportunity mission and our determination to break the link between people’s background and their future success. It will protect children from abuse, it will stop vulnerable children falling through the cracks in services and it will deliver a core guarantee of high standards with space for innovation in every child’s education. It will put in place a package of support to drive high and rising standards throughout education and throughout children’s social care so that every child can achieve and thrive.

Reforming children’s social care is critical to giving hundreds of thousands of children and young people the start in life that they deserve. Our approach to reform will break down barriers by shifting the focus of the children’s social care system to early support to keep families together. We will ensure that children can remain with their families where appropriate, support more children to live with kinship carers or in fostering families and fix the broken care market to tackle profiteering and put children’s needs first.

The previous Government bequeathed to us a bitter inheritance of not only child poverty across great swathes of our country, which affected one in three, or even one in two, of our young people, not just record numbers of children out of school or not turning up to school, not merely a children’s social care system at breaking point, but—bitterest of all—a fiscal blackhole. That blackhole must be tackled to get this country’s finances and future back on track, but it limits the speed at which we can deliver the ambition that all Labour Members have for a brighter future for Britain’s children.

Let me speak to our Government amendments. New clauses 18 to 22 introduce corporate parenting duties for Departments and relevant public bodies. A previous Labour Prime Minister observed, following Tawney:

“What a wise parent would wish for their children, so the state must wish for all its children.”

That principle lies behind the change that these new clauses seek to bring today, as we ensure that across the public sector we recognise the moral and necessary obligation to do all we can to level the playing field for children in care and care leavers. This group of young people faces significant disadvantages. Twenty-six per cent. of the homeless population are care-experienced, and around a quarter of the adult prison population were in care as children. Care leavers aged 19 to 21 are over three times more likely not to be in education, employment or training than their peers.

New clause 18 introduces corporate parenting responsibilities for Departments and the relevant public bodies, referred to as “relevant authorities”, listed in new schedule 1. New corporate parents will need to be alert to the needs of children in care and care leavers and assess the services or support they provide that are available to them. They will also need to provide them with the opportunities to participate in activities designed to promote their wellbeing or enhance their employment prospects.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I welcome what the Minister says. Last week, some of us had the opportunity to attend an event where Jamie Oliver was present. He is dyslexic, and he made a point that I think we need to recognise: those with dyslexia, autism and challenging educational behaviours also need to be helped. Will a section of the population that need help like this one also receive it?

[Stephen Morgan]

The hon. Member is a tireless champion for children and young people, and he regularly writes to me even though education is a devolved matter. I will say a bit more later about the support available for children with special educational needs and disabilities. He will know that SEND is at a crisis point, and this Government are absolutely committed to reforming the system and are working at pace to do so.

New clause 20 introduces a duty for new corporate parents and local authorities in England to work collaboratively with each other when it is in the best interests of children in care and care leavers when undertaking these duties. That is to avoid siloed working or duplication of efforts, addressing the challenges that children in care and care leavers face holistically in the same way that parents do when supporting their children.

New clause 21 introduces a duty for relevant authorities to have regard to guidance issued by the Secretary of State. The guidance will set out how the duty relates to different corporate parents and how that will continue to contribute to outcomes we seek for children in care and care leavers. We will develop that guidance in partnership with the sector and with the relevant authorities listed in new schedule 1.

New clause 22 introduces a duty on the Secretary of State to report on their corporate parenting activity every three years, bringing accountability to the new duty and allowing us to monitor progress and the impact of implementation. New schedule 1 provides a power for the Secretary of State to amend the list of corporate parents by affirmative regulations. The purpose is clear: where children in care and care leavers can be further supported by the addition of new public duties as corporate parents, or where we need to make changes to existing ones, they need not wait for fresh primary legislation. We shall have the power to act swiftly and powerfully in their interests. I am sure that hon. and right hon. Members across the House share the Government’s ambition to drive a step change in the experiences and outcomes of some of the most vulnerable children and young people in society and that they will support these new clauses.

--- Later in debate ---

[Munira Wilson]

I had not shared my speech with my hon. Friend, but she has anticipated the next couple of points that I was about to make. I agree with her strongly. I preface my comments by saying that there are many independent special schools run by private or voluntary sector providers that do an excellent job and are certainly not profiteering in the way that I am about to set out. Clearly, however, that is not the case across the board, with some firms making upwards of 20% in profit on what they charge. We must challenge whether that is justified. The crisis in state special educational needs and disability provision and the lack of specialist places have led to a growth in private provision that is crippling local authority finances, as my hon. Friend just said.

In 2021-22, councils spent £1.3 billion on independent and non-maintained special schools—twice what they spent just six years previously. The average cost of one of those places was £56,710, which, as my hon. Friend said, was twice the average cost of a state-run special school place. Many of the companies running these schools are the very same private equity companies running the children’s homes and fostering agencies that clause 15 is designed to deal with, so I am at a loss as to why the Government have not included independent special schools in the clause. I urge them to think again and accept our amendment.

My new clause 29 would impose a requirement on the Secretary of State to introduce a national wellbeing measurement programme for children and young people throughout England. I pay tribute to #BeeWell, Pro Bono Economics and the wider Our Wellbeing Our Voice coalition for their hard work in this area. As I have said several times during this Bill’s progress, I am more than a little surprised to find so little about children’s wellbeing in a Bill with this title. One in four children in the UK reports low wellbeing, and according to the programme for international student assessment data, our country is the lowest ranked in Europe on that head. Data on children’s wellbeing and mental health is fragmented across the NHS, schools and local authorities. It is crucial that we collect data to understand the challenges that young people face and to develop solutions, and that we seek to understand the efficacy of those solutions through the use of robust wellbeing data.

I welcome the Conservatives’ new clause 36 on wellbeing, phones and social media, both as a parent and as a parliamentarian. In this unprecedented digital age, we need to treat children’s social media and phone addiction as a public health issue. We have long supported the last Government’s guidance that schools should try to restrict mobile phone use during the school day, with—importantly—proper mitigations that teachers and heads can employ for young carers and those with medical conditions who use their phones as medical devices, and in other local circumstances that teachers and heads are best placed to identify.

[Jim Shannon]

Is the hon. Lady aware of the pilot scheme introduced in Northern Ireland by the Education Minister, Paul Givan? In some schools, all the children’s mobile phones are placed in pouches, so that they are never on show. This could make the Conservatives’ proposal acceptable to all, and there is still provision for carers to keep their phones with them. Northern Ireland has shown what can be done with a pilot scheme, and it is great that the House is following our lead.

[Munira Wilson]

It is always an honour to take an intervention from the hon. Gentleman, and it is great to hear about the pilot scheme in Northern Ireland. I have read that the Government in the Republic of Ireland have spent about €9 million on issuing those pouches to schools across the country. It would be useful and instructive for the UK Government to look at how that pilot goes, but I am not sure that we even need to wait for that. School leaders and parents are pressing us to go further now, and we must listen.

Putting the guidance into law will ensure that schools have the necessary support when they are challenged on their policies, and the resources to implement a mobile-free environment. A headteacher in my constituency told me that it would cost his school budget £20,000 to install lockers or issue the pouches described by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). Children must be able to learn in an environment that is free from the distraction of phones and the threat of bullying. We have also seen a significant reduction in truancy in schools where restrictions have been robust.

Mental Health Support: Educational Settings

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Thursday 13th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered mental health support in educational settings.

I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting this debate, and the MPs from across the House who supported its application. I also thank Emily Horsfall, my team and the staff at the Mental Health Foundation for their support in preparing for today’s debate.

There should be no doubt that good mental health and wellbeing are as critical to the progression of our young people as physical health is. Protecting mental health at an early age can have a defining impact on lifelong resilience and ensure positive mental health outcomes. At a time when young people up and down the country—especially girls and young women—face a barrage of challenges from what feels like a never-ending conveyor belt of demeaning and misogynistic content on social media, the consequences of the covid-19 pandemic and the cost of living crisis, this is a timely debate, and I thank hon. Members who have stayed in the Chamber to contribute to it.

Much of what I will say today reflects my conversations with young people, parents, teachers and professionals in my constituency of Redditch and the villages. When they approach me on a visit, when I am food shopping in Tesco or at one of my surgeries, they display courage and determination to build a system that is fit for purpose and which will ensure that all children get the support they need to have the most fulfilling lives possible. I hope this debate can be about how we can support our schools and education professionals, who are not trained mental health professionals but are so often on the frontline, to ensure that our children get the best support they can at the most appropriate time.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for bringing forward this issue. I was just looking at some of the stats for Northern Ireland in order to support his argument. In 2023, pupils with disabilities reported lower levels of general wellbeing across all measures than those who are not disabled. Does he agree that access to pastoral care teams, who are equipped and trained to help those with declining mental health due to disabilities, would be one way of addressing this very issue?

[Chris Bloore]

I think that is the first time the hon. Gentleman has intervened on me, so I feel very honoured. I absolutely agree with him, and I will talk about other affected groups later in my remarks. I thank him for his intervention.

I hope this debate can be about how we support our schools and education professionals, but I also hope that the discussion raises awareness about the challenges facing young people. I know that some people like to hand-wave away any discussion about mental health problems among children and young people. Since the announcement of this debate, I have read previous debates elsewhere, and a few people have whispered in my ear that they do not believe that children are resilient enough these days. Well, I simply do not buy that argument. I know it makes some uncomfortable when young people talk about their mental health challenges, but it can only be positive that awareness and the mainstreaming of mental health conditions have given so many across society the confidence to have honest conversations about how they are feeling and the impact that others’ actions can have on their mental health.

What do the statistics tell us about the state of our young people’s mental health? NHS statistics show us that about one in five children and young people aged eight to 25 had a probable mental disorder in 2023, and that the number of urgent referrals of children and young people to emergency mental health services has tripled since 2019. The uncomfortable truth is that waiting lists for children and adolescent mental health services can be a postcode lottery. For instance, in November last year, the average waiting time for a child to receive a referral for a first appointment in Hereford and Worcestershire was seven weeks, compared with the national average of five weeks. From freedom of information requests, we know that one child waited almost two years for an appointment. Referrals at the Hereford and Worcestershire health and care NHS trust have increased by 118% in the last five years—a trend that is reflected across the country.

Swann Report: 40th Anniversary

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 12th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)]

This month marks the 40th anniversary of the publication of the groundbreaking Swann report “Education for All”. The first of its kind, the report was commissioned to examine disparities in educational attainment and experiences among ethnic minority pupils, and made recommendations to tackle institutional racism in the education system. The inquiry, led by Lord Swann, was launched in response to a number of campaigns against racism in education, in particular the high-profile scandal of educationally subnormal—ESN—schools that disproportionately removed higher numbers of black Caribbean children from mainstream education settings, and wrongly labelled them educationally subnormal.

A mixture of education policy and racist attitudes was responsible for this shocking discrimination. The 1960s was a time of rising immigration, with the post-war British empire’s invitation to the Windrush generation of workers from the Caribbean and its other colonies to rebuild Britain. It was also a time of significant racist backlash, with the overt racism of Enoch Powell and the notions of racial superiority that gained traction in the political mainstream. These ideas worked their way into our national education policy, with the aim of creating and maintaining a two-tier labour force and a deliberately under-educated black population to fill all the menial jobs that white Brits did not want.

This significant miscarriage of justice took place in the 1960s and 1970s, and saw hundreds of black—mostly Caribbean—children wrongly sent to schools that were meant for pupils with severe physical and mental disabilities. These schools had existed since the 1940s, due to the provision, under the Education Act 1944, of appropriate schools for pupils with severe mental or physical disabilities. But by the late 1960s, almost 30% of pupils in ESN schools in London were black immigrant children, compared with 15% in mainstream schools.

It was clear that decisions were being made by teachers, educational psychologists and local education authorities to place these children in ESN schools for reasons other than mental or physical disabilities. Although parents were aware that their children were being forced to struggle against a racist system, most were isolated and not given the information that they needed to make informed decisions about their child’s education. It was not until an Inner London Education Authority report was leaked that the true extent of this shocking discrimination was revealed.

Grenadian educator Bernard Coard took the initiative to write and publish the groundbreaking pamphlet “How the West Indian child is made educationally subnormal in the British school system”, making the leaked ILEA information accessible to parents and communities. Mass community mobilisation as a result of Coard’s pamphlet inspired parents and community organisations to campaign against the now undeniable institutional racism in British schools. That forced the Government to respond, and these schools were eventually shut down in the early 1980s.

Published in March 1985, Swann’s report confirmed Coard’s analysis: the persistence of racist stereotypes, biased IQ tests, a deep misunderstanding of culture and language, and biases in teacher expectations, disciplinary practices and curriculum content were creating significant barriers to education for black children. It challenged the racist myths that black children were less intelligent than their white counterparts, and recognised instead that the structural racism embedded in the British education system was disadvantaging them. Inadequate support for pupils with English as a second language, a lack of diversity in the curriculum, and a significant disconnect between schools and parents from ethnic minority backgrounds were identified as further barriers to black children achieving their full academic potential.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Lady for securing the debate. I spoke to her beforehand to ask permission to intervene. I looked at the Swann report, which she has outlined very clearly. Does she agree that although substantial strides have been taken since that eye-opening report, the learning curve for the integration and understanding that we all wish to see must continue, as we strive to ensure that each of us can claim the best of British education, incorporating our own ethnic backgrounds and rich cultural history and heritage? Things are better, but there is still a lot more to do.

[Kim Johnson]

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. However, as I will say later in my speech, I do not think that things have substantially improved, as he suggests, for lots of black children in our education system.

The report produced several key recommendations, including diversifying and decolonising the curriculum, more diversity in teacher recruitment, anti-racism training for teachers, more resources for language support, better data collection and monitoring, and a better approach to working with parents and communities to build trust and encourage active participation in pupils’ education.

Predictably, the Thatcher Government did little to progress those recommendations. However, the following Labour Government took some of the lessons learned as a framework for our Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, particularly the introduction of the duty for public institutions, including schools, to promote racial equality.

However, we know that many racist barriers still exist in education—from disparities in educational attainment to the school-to-prison pipeline, the adultification of black pupils, to the presence of police in schools and the need for a truly anti-racist curriculum. Today’s patterns of racism, segregation and exclusion in education have evolved directly from the policies and attitudes that drove the ESN scandal. The closure of ESN schools in the 1980s led directly to a rapid expansion in the use of school exclusions. We began to see higher numbers incarcerated in prisons, and the expansion of the use of sets and tiering in education, whereby certain groups of children are increasingly denied the opportunity to sit exams at certain levels and then the opportunity to progress in educational settings, including university.

The establishment of pupil referral units is recognised as another method of systematic exclusion from education. We must be clear: the use of PRUs and exclusions are a symptom of failure of the education system. The disruptive behaviour of a child is a cry for help, not a crime. An education system that does not respond with care and support is an education system that is broken. The number of exclusions have soared in recent years, with children as young as five being kicked out of school. Draconian behavioural policies disproportionately impact on poor children, those living in care, and those from black Caribbean, mixed and Gypsy, Roma and Traveller backgrounds.

Swann’s recommendations for an inclusive education system are more important today, and we must take this opportunity to update the lessons learned and apply them to our current system. The societal impact is still as relevant today as it was in the 1960s and 1970s. Lessons must be learnt on the 40th anniversary of the Swann report in order to put an end to this systemic discrimination. Evidence of the scale of the injustice of children being forced needlessly into ESN schools in the 1960s and 1970s is scarce, but we do know about the impact that misclassification as educationally subnormal has had on survivors, some of whom have joined us in the Public Gallery. I would like to take this opportunity to thank them for all their work in exposing this scandal and campaigning to raise awareness of the racial injustice that they suffered. Their work has already made a huge difference, and they have my commitment to keep fighting for the justice and dignity that they deserve.

We heard from some of the survivors at the event I held yesterday in Parliament. We heard from Noel Gordon, who told us that he was wrongly misclassified as educationally subnormal after a chain of events starting with him being diagnosed at the age of four with sickle cell. He describes being bullied and abused by teachers, running away from school and his mum fighting tooth and nail to get him out, but to no avail. Through his determination, he has achieved several qualifications including a degree.

We heard from Maisie Barrett, who is a natural creative. She described how she needed support with her academic skills and her stutter, but those resources were and still are systematically denied to black children. She has said that her grandchild is a victim of today’s SEND system, just like she was a victim of ESN. She told us that if she had received a proper education, she might have pursued her dreams and migrated to Jamaica, and fought for recognition for being wrongly classified as educationally subnormal.

We heard from Rene Stephens, who was expelled from his mainstream secondary school after his teacher assaulted him and was sent to an ESN school that neglected his academic development. He left school with no qualifications. Deprived of education and support, he has now spent 18 years in and out of the criminal justice system due to his misclassification. He was forced to abandon his dream of becoming head chef at the Savoy hotel. He says he continues to struggle with societal participation as a direct consequence of being denied a proper secondary education.

We heard from Denise Davidson, who described how, even in her innocence as a young girl, she realised that her school was different to other schools. She remembers challenging her educational psychologist, and described how her experiences now help her as a children’s social worker to support vulnerable children in similar positions.

This is not only an historic injustice; it is a living one for all who went through it. Most left school at 16 or earlier, unable to read, write or count, and were denied the opportunity to thrive and achieve their full potential. The survivors of ESN still have significant problems with self-worth and with accessing meaningful, well-paid work after they were denied an education.