Evacuation Chairs: Schools and Colleges

Debate between Jim Shannon and Jacob Collier

Monday 1st December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jacob Collier]

Yes, absolutely. I will come on to some of the legislation later, but the hon. Member highlights a really important issue and I know that he is a big supporter in this space, so I thank him for that intervention.

Fire and rescue services in England attended 417 primary fires in education premises in the last financial year; primary fires are generally more serious fires causing damage to property or harm to people. Of these primary fires, 355 were accidental fires and 62 were deliberate. When we look at the current legal and guidance framework, the gaps become clear.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is nice to see you in the Chair, Sir Alec. I did not know that you would be chairing Westminster Hall. I wish you well.

The provision of evacuation chairs is imperative—all schools and colleges, across the whole of the United Kingdom, must have them for pupils, staff and visitors. Furthermore, where evacuation chairs exist, staff must be trained in their use. Without mandatory training, the presence of a chair alone does not ensure safety. Does the hon. Member agree that there must be an adequate number of staff trained in the use of these chairs so that schools can make full and proper use of them in the event of an emergency?

[Jacob Collier]

I agree with the hon. Member—he must have read what is coming up in my speech. He is absolutely right, and I will come to that point.

Under the Equality Act 2010, schools have duties to avoid substantial disadvantage for disabled pupils, but they are not required to make any physical changes to features of the building for individual children. Instead, they must prepare long-term accessibility plans that look years ahead. That means that a multi-storey school does not have to provide an immediate safe route for a specific child who cannot use stairs. Fire safety legislation requires responsible persons to ensure that everyone can escape safely, but it does not specify how. It does not mandate personal emergency evacuation plans—or PEEPs—for pupils who cannot self-evacuate. It does not require evacuation chairs. It still allows the use of refuge rooms, even though children cannot be left alone in them and cannot legally be lifted by staff.

Current guidance for the evacuation of disabled pupils is simply not sufficient, as has been highlighted by Lucas’s experience. In many cases, PEEPs do not identify the need for evacuation chairs, which means that schools conclude the equipment is unnecessary and therefore never purchase it. PEEPs vary widely in quality, and often lack a clear method for onward evacuation. They need to be significantly strengthened.

In 2015, the Equality and Human Rights Commission commented that schools were in effect exempt from removing barriers to extraction during emergency. That exemption explains why so many pupils remain unprotected. There is also a profound accountability gap: no single regulator or public body is charged with assessing whether disabled pupils can be evacuated safely. No one is tasked with checking whether reasonable adjustments have been made for the purpose of extraction. Ofsted does not inspect evacuation readiness or assess whether disabled pupils can leave a building in an emergency. In that vacuum, schools are left to interpret a patchwork of rules that are not abundantly clear. In a response to a written question from the hon. Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan), the Department for Education stated:

“Schools and their responsible bodies are not obliged to notify the department of fires at their premises and we therefore do not routinely collect or record this data…nor information on fire-safety-related repairs.”

PEEPs are not legally mandated in schools. They are planned to become mandatory for residential buildings following the Grenfell Tower tragedy, but remain non-mandatory in school environments, which have the highest numbers of individuals who cannot self-evacuate. That contrast should concern every Member of this House. In some circumstances, staying put and awaiting the fire service is the safest approach. When someone dials 999, fire control operators will issue that safety advice. In Lucas’s case it was not even recognised where he was in the building. That highlights a need for a clearer process for everybody to follow so that all people are accounted for and safely evacuated.

Evacuation chairs are not suitable for every disabled pupil, but they are a safe and internationally recognised non-lifting method for bringing a person downstairs in an emergency. When a child cannot use stairs and has a lesson on the upper floor, the school must have a safe evacuation method. It should not fall on teachers to improvise solutions when an alarm is sounding and smoke is spreading, and it should not fall on a child to wait in fear and hope that someone will remember that they are upstairs.

This petition is measured in its request. It does not call for every school to purchase equipment that is not relevant to their buildings; it calls for evacuation chairs or equivalent equipment to be required when a pupil’s needs make them necessary. It also calls for personal emergency evacuation plans to be prepared for those who cannot self-evacuate and, crucially, for them to contain a clear method for reaching safety. Finally, it calls for a clear national standard, so that schools are not guessing what is expected of them.

The Labour Government have committed to building safer and more inclusive public services, and we promise to learn the lessons of the Grenfell tragedy. We also promise that no one who cannot self-evacuate will be left without proper planning. Schools must be a part of that commitment.

Today, I urge the Government to act. We must ensure that personal emergency evacuation plans are required for every pupil or staff member who cannot self-evacuate. A personal emergency evacuation plan must set out the equipment, the route, the timing and the staff support needed. We must establish national expectations for evacuation equipment—not just a blanket rule, but a clear principle that when a child is taught on an upper floor and cannot use stairs, their school must provide a safe assisted evacuation method.

We must provide consistent guidance and high-quality training, so that staff know exactly what to do. We must make accountability meaningful. It must be clear which organisation checks whether disabled pupils can be evacuated and whether reasonable adjustments have been made for that purpose. Finally, we must design these policies with disabled pupils, their families and school staff at the centre. They know better than any of us what a safe and dignified evacuation looks like.

I will close my remarks by quoting the end of Lucas’s poem—with a plea that we cannot ignore:

“So hear my voice through smoke and ash

Make sure the next can make a dash

For no one’s life should end in flame

Because the world forgot their name”.

Our responsibility as legislators and as a Government is not only to remember the names but to protect those children, to ensure that no child is ever forgotten in a refuge room, and to build a system where a disabled pupil is not an afterthought but a child whose safety is guaranteed. We need to ensure that no student is ever left behind like Lucas was.

I thank those who took the time to meet me in preparation for this debate, and I especially thank Nick and Lucas. I look forward to hearing the contributions of other hon. Members, and to Ministers turning this petition into meaningful action.

A50/A500 Corridor

Debate between Jim Shannon and Jacob Collier

Monday 20th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jacob Collier]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. There will be a £24 million benefit to Stoke-on-Trent, a £30 million boost to Uttoxeter and east Staffordshire, and an £11 million benefit to Newcastle-under-Lyme, which demonstrates the importance of investing in this corridor.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Will the hon. Member give way?

[Jacob Collier]

I will.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Jim Shannon, on the subject of the A50/A500 corridor.

[Jim Shannon]

I congratulate the hon. Member on bringing this debate before the House. He is an assiduous Member, and he is doing extremely well in bringing forward his constituents’ issues. Does he agree that the Government must also look at the impact that long-term work will have on the motorists who rely on this road and, in particular, the emergency services? Does he agree that if any improvements are to happen, proper consideration must be given to the impact they will have on the day-to-day lives of the hundreds of his constituents who rely on this road daily, whether for employment or education, or, indeed, at times of emergency?

[Jacob Collier]

I was not sure whether the people of Northern Ireland use the A50, but I am grateful for that intervention. I am going to come on to safety concerns, which are a key part of this debate.

We have the full backing of 50 local business leaders and the Staffordshire chambers of commerce, who wrote with me to the Chancellor to urge investment in this vital corridor. That is a clear demonstration of the support we have from the business community.

Financial Assistance to Ukraine Bill

Debate between Jim Shannon and Jacob Collier

2nd reading
Wednesday 20th November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Jacob Collier (Burton and Uttoxeter) (Lab)]

May I start by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley (Linsey Farnsworth) on her excellent maiden speech? I have heard that former Crown prosecutors can go far in this place, and I am sure that she will.

I rise to speak in strong support of the Bill, and I am grateful to colleagues for showing their support for it, because it is essential to the UK’s continued steadfast support for Ukraine as it defends itself against Russia’s illegal and brutal invasion. Through the Bill, the Labour Government will ensure that funds derived from sanctioned Russian sovereign assets—assets that were once used to fuel Putin’s war machine—will help Ukraine in its fight for freedom. That is not only morally right but in Britian’s national interest, as so many hon. Members have said. Supporting Ukraine means supporting the frontline of our democracy and our shared values of liberty and self-determination.

Most Members of the House recognise that it is critical to stand with Ukraine, but I am deeply disappointed that some question our unwavering support. Some have suggested that concessions should be made on both sides in this war, as if there is some kind of equivalence between Ukraine’s fight for its freedom and Russia’s criminal and illegal invasion. Let us be absolutely clear that calls for concessions send the wrong message to Ukraine, the world and future generations. These calls undermine Ukraine’s sovereignty, reward Putin’s recklessness and disregard the horrific suffering that has been inflicted on the Ukrainian people.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

The hon. Gentleman is right to mention what the future holds. We all want peace, Ukrainians above all, but that peace must be based on justice, and we in this House must commit to that. The message from this House today should not be about the Ukrainians under pressure from Russian troops, but about our commitment in this House to them. We can influence the United States President to ensure that things look more positive for Ukraine. Does the hon. Member agree that that has to be the message that we send from this House?

[Jacob Collier]

I now have a parliamentary medal: I have taken an intervention from the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). I am grateful, and I agree with what he said.

Some of the views that we hear are a dangerous form of appeasement that only emboldens the aggressor and undermines the cause of peace, freedom and democracy. That weakens Ukraine, our position and the values that we in this House should defend. We must reject such defeatism and appeasement, and we must stand firm in the face of tyranny, for Ukraine and for the values that we hold dear in this democracy. To do anything less is to surrender our ideals, and that is not an option.

The Bill demonstrates that this Government are committed to doing the opposite. It builds on our already substantial support, including £3 billion in annual military aid and £2.3 billion in additional funding, drawn from immobilised Russian assets. It also enables the UK’s £2.26 billion contribution to the G7’s extraordinary loan scheme. This funding will directly support Ukraine’s defence by providing vital air defence systems, artillery and armoured vehicles. That support is vital, not only for Ukraine but for the security of the UK and the wider world. As the Chief Secretary to the Treasury rightly highlighted, a safe and secure Ukraine means a safe and secure United Kingdom.

It is testament to our country’s leadership on the global stage, and a point of pride, that the issue has had cross-party support in this Parliament. The Prime Minister’s commitment to continued military aid, and the UK’s role in driving the largest sanctions package ever imposed on a major economy, reflect our iron-clad determination to hold Russia to account. Putin is now 1,000 days into a war that he thought would last just a few. His miscalculation has drained Russia’s economy; 40% of its annual budget is now consumed by the war effort. His forces have suffered their highest rate of casualties since the conflict began. This is no time for us to falter.

I pay tribute to the bravery of the Ukrainian armed forces, and the crucial work of the UK armed forces in training their Ukrainian counterparts. Let me say how proud I am of our troops’ vital contributions to Ukraine’s defence efforts—a pride that was reinforced by my visit to the 29th Regiment Royal Logistic Corps and the Commando Training Centre Royal Marines. Seeing their dedication at first hand was a reminder of the professionalism and commitment of our armed forces, who are making a tangible difference in Ukraine’s fight for freedom. The unity of this House, our Government and our allies is essential to ensure that Ukraine has the resources that it needs to prevail. Let us send a clear message today: Britain will stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes.