Services for Children in Care

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Tuesday 27th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

I would like to take this opportunity, as I have not yet had one, to warmly welcome the Minister to his place. I know that he is covering tonight for the Under-Secretary of State for Education, my hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister), but I am sure that he will do a fantastic job. I know that in his role on early education, which is also an area of interest for me, he will be a steadfast champion and a fantastic member of this Government, so I welcome him.

I first applied for this debate after a conversation I had at the West Chadsmoor NHS clinic back in June. I had gone there to talk to the team about the fantastic Pride in Place funding coming to our area and to meet some of the brilliant clinicians based there who specialise in areas such as child and adolescent mental health services, paediatric podiatry, occupational health and various forms of family support. As I am sure Members across the House will have experienced, I often leave a visit in my constituency with much more work than I walked in with, but that is of course what I was elected to do, and it is a pleasure to do that work.

One of the conversations I had at West Chadsmoor raised an issue I felt needed to be brought to this House. It was about vulnerable children being placed in Staffordshire by local authorities elsewhere in the country and the problems that arise when the right people are not told that those children are coming. I heard from clinicians that increasingly they are coming across young people who have been placed in our area without Staffordshire county council being notified. Sadly, CAMHS staff sometimes encounter those children for the first time when they are in a serious mental health crisis. The doctors I spoke to described young people who might be self-harming or experiencing suicidal thoughts. These are children who will almost certainly have already experienced deep trauma, family breakdown and considerable instability. Then they are moved miles from home—sometimes hundreds of miles—and the support that they had, we hope, been receiving does not always follow them.

The statutory requirement is for the responsible local authority to notify the host local authority when a child or young person in care is placed within its area. but I am hearing that this does not always happen and does not always include the relevant information regarding identified risks and support needs. Consideration should also be given to the suitability of the placement, such as the availability of local services. When a local authority decides to place a child in another part of the country, that child arrives with their own history, their own vulnerabilities and, often, an established package of support. Yet the authority responsible for receiving them may not even know they are there.

The clinicians who want to do their best to replicate that support are sometimes left on the back foot. They may only discover the child when something has gone wrong and they come to them in a very bad way. That is not a sensible way to organise care for any child, let alone one who is already vulnerable, which is why, of course, the legal duty to inform exists.

In my constituency, we have seen rapid growth in independent children’s homes in recent years, partly because of the relatively low property prices but also, as we know, because of a chronic lack of foster carers. As a former foster carer myself, I very much welcome the recruitment campaign that the Department launched last week.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for bringing forward the debate. He always brings incredibly important debates to Westminster Hall and the Chamber, including on the Adjournment, and I congratulate him on their standard and the contribution he makes to this House on behalf of his constituents, which is appreciated. He mentioned fostering. The Fostering Network found that only 33% of foster carers report that their allowances fully cover the cost of raising a child. Approximately 66% of people believe that they could be a good foster carer if there were no practical barriers. During this cost of living crisis, does he agree that we must recognise the additional pressures and that more must be done to financially support those who have a heart for fostering children to both take this on and be equipped to do so?

[Josh Newbury]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind words. He always has a kind word to say and a valuable contribution to make to any debate on any topic, which is quite impressive. He is absolutely right to highlight the fact that there are so many people in our country who would love to foster and have the attributes and the motivation to do so, but who simply cannot afford to because the costs they would have to meet exceed the payment they would get. We need to raise awareness of the fact that fostering is paid for—many people do not realise that—and we need to bring those stories to the House, as he has rightly done, to highlight the need to do far more to support our foster carers, who do an incredible amount.

[Dr Allison Gardner (Stoke-on-Trent South) (Lab)]

I have constituents who are foster parents of children with extremely complex needs. It is a laudable but very challenging vocation. Placements often fail because the foster parents do not get the wraparound support and respite that they need. Such breakdowns can be even more challenging if the children are from out of area and then end up getting moved again. Does my hon. Friend agree that all councils must provide the correct support and respite for our foster parents?

[Josh Newbury]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend, who speaks from deep personal knowledge of this topic. She is right to highlight the experience of foster carers in her constituency, who all too often feel that the buck always stops with them and that there is never any let-up. It can be an incredibly challenging role—we are talking about some of the most vulnerable children in our society, who often have incredibly complex needs that present themselves in many different ways. It is the responsibility of our society as a whole to ensure that those children are well cared for, but we also need to ensure that our foster carers have the support and the wraparound care that is needed to succeed, because they play such an incredible role. When my husband and I were fostering, we were very fortunate to have that support from our county council, and we need to ensure that that support is available to everybody.

Staffordshire is increasingly welcoming children who are placed in our county by local authorities elsewhere in the country, and I am very glad that our county is able to play that role in caring for vulnerable young people. The figures for Cannock Chase give us a sense of how the picture is changing. In 2025-26, five children’s homes opened and two closed, with a net increase of seven places. The county council told one of the councillors in my constituency that there are 19 homes for children with emotional and behavioural difficulties and seven for children with learning difficulties. Because of the high level of EBD homes, the county council is even taking the step of asking potential providers not to set up new EBD homes in my constituency for the time being, despite the shortages we are all aware of.

As more homes open, our local services clearly have a growing role in supporting children whose previous care arrangements may have been organised hundreds of miles away. I am proud that Staffordshire can provide care for those children, but I want to ensure that the local authorities placing them here are giving our services the information that they need early enough to plan properly. My point is not that Staffordshire should do less to support these children; it is that, if we are going to provide that care, we must have the communication and co-ordination needed to do it as well as possible. These children deserve more than a placement address; they deserve a joined-up package of care that follows them wherever they move to.

The doctors I spoke to explained that, when Staffordshire county council receives the appropriate notification, CAMHS has a chance to contact the young person’s previous NHS trust, establish what support they have been receiving and work out how that support can be continued locally. That is the difference between planning for a child’s needs and reacting when those needs escalate. Without notification, that opportunity is taken away. The receiving services may not know about the child, may not have their clinical history and may not understand what treatment or support has been interrupted. It also means that GPs may not know that a young person has entered their area; diagnoses, risks and existing care plans may not accompany the placement; responsibility for GP registration, crisis support and ongoing care may remain unclear; services might respond without essential clinical and contextual information; and young people may experience avoidable crisis escalation—emergency department attendance and in-patient stays are all too common.

Fragmented arrangements can undermine safeguarding and continuity of care. Commissioning of provision is carried out by local authorities, but if they are not aware of what has been commissioned from the home area, which can often include a comprehensive health package to sustain the placement, it is not hard to see where things can go wrong. In some cases, local services can end up duplicating already commissioned input, leading to double-funded provision.

That complexity is compounded when multiple providers operate within one geographical area. In Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent, there are multiple CAMHS providers, alongside specialist children in care health teams hosted by different organisations. Acute hospitals attended by young people may be managed by separate provider trusts, many of which do not have access to community health records that are held elsewhere. These organisational boundaries can create barriers to timely information sharing and co-ordinated care.

Similarly, when children move between multiple out-of-area placements, information can become fragmented across different systems and accessing records held by external providers may not be possible. The issue is particularly relevant to my constituency and the wider Staffordshire area, where, as I mentioned earlier, we have seen an increase in the number of children’s homes in recent years. As that number grows, we need to be confident that the right safeguards, oversight and support are keeping pace. A children’s home is not simply a property with staff in it—it is a place where some of our most vulnerable children should receive the care, stability and specialist support that they really need.

To give a tragic example of how badly things can go wrong, I will share one story from Cannock Chase. Last summer, a constituent in Hednesford raised concerns with me about the care being provided to a vulnerable young person in an independent children’s home very close to where he lived. That young person had clearly had an incredibly traumatic experience at a young age and had complex needs. The placement was intensive, to the point where the home accepted just one child at a time, supported by several staff, 24/7.

However, the company responsible for that home clearly had no intention of following through on the promised support package, which was not put in place. I heard that CAMHS were not even contacted, despite the company having put in its bid that local CAMHS services in my area were good and dealt with looked-after children very well, and that it had already made preliminary inquiries with CAMHS. The promised two-on-one or three-on-one support was not followed through either, to the point where the young person was at one point left alone and was found by neighbours banging on doors, clearly in extreme distress and mental health crisis.

I cannot independently verify every detail of that story and I do not want to prejudge any investigation that might take place. I have also visited excellent homes in my constituency, run by people who care deeply about providing the highest quality trauma-informed care, and I believe they are the majority. However, these concerns underline why we need effective oversight and clear accountability for the care being provided.

This is not a narrow issue affecting only children in residential care or those in Staffordshire alone. It speaks to a wider challenge in how we co-ordinate support across local authority boundaries. Figures that I have seen show that in 2024, 45% of looked-after children were placed outside their home local authority, up from 40% in 2015. While 69% were placed within 20 miles of home, that proportion has fallen from 76% in 2015.

The same challenges can affect kinship families. The 2024 annual survey by Kinship found that nearly a third of kinship families lived in a different local authority area from the one the child had lived in before coming into their care. Of those families, 57% reported difficulties accessing support as a result. These are different circumstances, but they point to the same question in my mind: when a child’s life crosses a local authority boundary, does the support they need follow them? Whether a child is living in a children’s home or being cared for by a grandparent, aunt, uncle or another family member, we must not allow administrative boundaries to become barriers to accessing the right support.

That leaves me with four questions for the Minister, who as I said is standing in for the Under-Secretary of State for Education, my hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven and Workington, who I know is doing a lot of work in this area. First, what steps are the Government taking to ensure local authorities meet their existing statutory duty to notify receiving authorities when placing children out of area, and to identify where that duty is not being met?

Secondly, how are the Government working with health partners to improve the sharing of information when a child moves, so that their clinical history, existing treatment and crisis support arrangements can follow them and the services can plan ahead? Thirdly, how will the Government ensure that their regulatory and inspection framework provides effective oversight of children’s homes, so that the care and supervision children are promised is the care they actually receive? Finally, as the Government expand placement capacity and roll out regional care co-operatives—a very welcome development to my mind—how will they ensure that these reforms improve not just the availability of placements, but the co-ordination among local authorities, children’s homes and health services?

I began by talking about the clinicians at West Chadsmoor NHS clinic, and I will end by returning to them. They see children who have already faced more disruption to their young lives than most of us can even imagine. They want to give those children the stability, understanding and care that they deserve, and the least we should expect of the system that supports them is that it gives those professionals the information and co-operation they need to do that. A child should not have to experience a crisis before the services around them realise that support has fallen away; a family should not have to become an expert in local government responsibilities before it can access help; and a local authority boundary should never become a barrier to a child’s wellbeing.

I recognise that the Government are taking steps to address the shortage of placements. The £560 million investment in children’s homes and foster care, alongside the roll-out of regional care co-operatives, is intended to help to create more suitable places closer to where children live. That matters, because the best way to manage the challenges of out-of-area placements is, wherever possible, to avoid placing children so far away in the first place. When children do need to move, we must ensure that their care and support move with them.

I welcome the steps that this Government are taking to increase placement capacity, strengthen the system and improve how services work together. The investment in children’s homes and foster care provides an opportunity for us to ensure that more children can be cared for closer to home. My ask is that, as this work progresses, we keep the experience of the child at its centre. That means pushing local authorities to share information, health services being able to plan ahead, and clear accountability for ensuring that the support a child needs is actually there. Every child in care deserves stability, safety and the chance to thrive, wherever they are placed. I look forward to working with the Minister to ensure that the Government’s reforms deliver those outcomes for children in Staffordshire and across the country.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Paul Waugh)]

I thank Members for attending and contributing to this debate. This is a deeply important subject, and I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase (Josh Newbury) for bringing it before us today. As has already been noted, he is a doughty champion for his constituents and an excellent constituency MP. I had the privilege of knowing his Labour predecessor in Cannock Chase, Tony Wright, and my hon. Friend is more than living up to his example.

This Government are clear that children in care should grow up safe, supported and able to thrive, regardless of their background. Through the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 and our children’s social care reset, we are delivering the biggest overhaul of children’s social care and child protection in a generation. We are delivering the change that we promised.

We are building a children’s social care system that puts families at the heart of our work. My hon. Friend has already referenced kinship care, which is really important in that. We know that keeping children in their immediate and wider family network is key for improving outcomes, but we want a system that builds rather than breaks relationships, ensuring that every care-experienced young person starts adulthood with loving, enduring relationships.

Let me address directly the questions that my hon. Friend put to me. On what steps the Government are taking to ensure that local authorities meet their existing statutory duties when placing children out of area and what happens when those duties are not met, let me be clear: if a local authority has to place a child outside their area, not notifying the incoming local authority is a breach of the law. It is imperative that that happens so that ongoing support can be arranged in the new area.

We know that far too many children are currently placed out of their local area when they come into care or are moved during their time in care. In 2025, 22% of children in care—that is 18,000 children—lived more than 20 miles from their home community. Sometimes, that distance is for a good reason—children might be moving to live with their wider family network—but too often, children are placed far from home, which disrupts their relationships with family and friends, their education and their access to the services that support them.

Where concerns arise that duties are not being met, as has been indicated by my hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase, they should be escalated through local safeguarding arrangements, with relevant partners working together to identify risks and co-ordinate action. Furthermore, Ofsted takes account of whether local authorities are complying with that duty through its ILACS inspections—the inspecting local authority children’s services framework—including whether the placing authority promptly notifies the receiving authority when a child moves into its area and ensures they can access services that meet their needs. The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 strengthens the information sharing between agencies, while multi-agency safeguarding arrangements support safeguarding partners in identifying risks, sharing intelligence and co-ordinating action for children placed outside their home area. Additionally, as part of a wider communication, the Department wrote to local authorities earlier this year, reminding them of their statutory duty to inform host local authorities when placing children out of area.

My hon. Friend asked about working with health partners. Statutory guidance is clear that relevant services, including integrated care boards, should be notified before a child moves between placements, so that arrangements can be made to meet their needs. Where a move is made in an emergency, notification must follow within five working days. The guidance also recognises that identifying the right contact can sometimes be difficult, and it suggests practical steps, such as using generic inboxes to help ensure that information reaches the right organisation. More broadly, though, the new information-sharing duty strengthens the requirement on safeguarding partners, including in health, to share relevant information when a child relocates, so that important information about their safety and welfare is never lost. Importantly, the absence of a formal data-sharing agreement should not prevent information from being shared, where that duty applies. The Department for Education, the Department of Health and Social Care and the NHS are working closely together to improve health outcomes for looked-after children and care leavers, and to ensure that information flows effectively between services and that there is no barrier to children receiving the support that they need.

Our reforms to children’s social care strengthen multi-agency working and information sharing, and the Home Again programme will bring social care, health, education and youth justice together around a single plan for children with the most complex needs. Just last week, we announced the new mental health pilot in Greater Manchester, which embeds mental health professionals in children’s social care teams. That pilot, which is called Care Together, replaces fragmented provision with faster access to expert, needs-led mental health support, including family therapy and support for parents and primary care-givers. I am excited to see the impact that this £9.4 million pilot will have on 7,000 children and their families across my constituency of Rochdale, as well as in neighbouring Stockport and Tameside.

Turning to my hon. Friend’s question about how the Government will ensure that their regulatory and inspection framework provides effective oversight of children’s homes, the Minister for children and families, my hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister), keeps the adequacy of the regulatory framework under regular review. In April 2026, Ofsted introduced updates to the social care common inspection framework to promote high-quality inspections for children’s homes and other settings. That focus on the impact of services on the lives and relationships of children and families is crucial. Ofsted has recently consulted on further improvements to its inspection framework for children’s social care, and will set out plans for 2027 in due course.

[Josh Newbury]

It is good to hear that Ofsted is adapting and growing its inspection regime to reflect the fact that many children’s homes are opening, and the variation in practice seems quite large. Will my hon. Friend ask the Minister for children and families to look into whether Ofsted’s capacity to carry out inspections matches the growth in children’s homes in certain parts of the country, such as mine? We are seeing rapid growth in a short space of time. We need to make sure that the situation does not run away from us in those areas, and to avoid poorer practice in areas where there are not as many inspectors as we need.

[Paul Waugh]

My hon. Friend makes an important point, and I will certainly pass that on to the Minister for children and families. He is right that we need the capacity to match the requirements that we are imposing.

My hon. Friend’s last point, which was about the impact of regional care co-operatives on improving sufficiency and co-ordination, is really important. We now have seven regional care co-operatives covering more than 100 local authorities, including his own, Staffordshire, through the west midlands partnership. I can confirm that regional care co-operatives are not simply about increasing placement capacity; as we have heard tonight, children in care can be involved with multiple services, across local authorities, health and justice, so co-ordinated regional planning and partnership working is a core requirement for these new regional care co-operatives. By bringing these partners together to forecast need and commission care more strategically, regional care co-operatives will help ensure that provision and wider support are better joined up around children’s needs—a point that my hon. Friend was right to make repeatedly. We should be focusing on the child; all the services around them should be child-centred.

I recognise the concerns about the distribution of children’s homes across England. They are legitimate, and they are shared cross-party. Some areas have a disproportionally high concentration of homes, while others have insufficient provision. That can contribute to children being placed further away from their support networks and can lead to poor outcomes. We know that can be driven by a focus on maximising profits; some providers are attracted by lower property costs. We know for sure that this is happening in the north, and in the west midlands.

We are taking action to reshape the children’s social care market and improve placement sufficiency to combat those problems. Through the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026, we are rebalancing the market, increasing transparency, and helping local authorities to secure the placements that children need. We want the right homes in the right places, so that children, when it is in their best interests, are kept close to their communities. Our aim is to support provision where there is a clear need and the children’s needs can be fully met. We are also providing significant capital funding to deliver 540 new placements in local authority-owned children’s homes by March 2029, in 75 authorities. Two hundred will be specialist placements for children at risk of deprivation of liberty; 237 are already completed, registered and operational.

Several Members have mentioned the work that we are leading on fostering reforms to ensure that as few children as possible need to enter care in the first place. As my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent South (Dr Gardner) rightly pointed out, there should be respite support for foster parents, but all too often, it is not there. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), who is no longer in the Chamber, was right to say that we should be removing the practical barriers to fostering. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase has personal experience of the impact of being a foster carer, and I want to put on record our thanks to him and all the foster parents who do such a marvellous job, day in, day out, and week in, week out, with some of the most vulnerable children in society. We owe them a deep debt of gratitude.

In March last year, 67% of all children looked after in England were living with foster families, but 46% of those children were placed out of their local area. That is why the Government have launched the fostering action plan that my hon. Friend mentioned. We are committed to creating 10,000 more foster places during this Parliament. The plan includes an England-wide recruitment campaign—I hope that Members have already read about it—which is challenging the myths that prevent people from considering fostering, and recruiting thousands more foster carers who can give children the loving, stable homes that they need and deserve. The plan is backed by an £88 million investment over two years, which includes funds for the expansion of dedicated regional foster carer recruitment hubs; support to enable foster carers to adapt their homes, so that they can care for more children; an increase in the number of Mockingbird peer-support clusters, which I know are greatly valued across the country; and the launch of a fostering innovation programme to support better outcomes for children.

We know that the best way to keep children safe and give them the best possible start in life is to support families before problems reach crisis point. Our “families first for children” pathfinders have tested that approach in 10 local authorities, bringing together earlier, more intensive family help, expert multi-agency child protection and wider family networks to identify problems sooner and help children to remain safely within their families, whenever that is in their best interests. We are now applying those lessons nationally through the families first partnership programme, backed by £2.4 billion over the next three years, including £853 million in 2026-27. This represents a fundamental shift towards prevention, strengthening families and ensuring that when serious safeguarding concerns arise, children benefit from co-ordinated expertise across agencies.

Let me again thank my hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase for bringing this important matter to the House, and reiterate the Government’s aim that every child in care should receive the same joined-up support, stability and opportunity that we would want for our own children. We recognise that local and national Government, health and education authorities, and every partner must work together for each child in our care. I know that my colleague the Minister for children and families—who has done such marvellous work in this regard, both inside and outside Government—will continue to push through the reforms we have discussed this evening, which the system needs so urgently, so that children are safe, supported, close to the people and places that matter to them most, and able to thrive.

Question put and agreed to.

Oral Answers to Questions

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Monday 2nd March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

7. What steps she is taking to improve SEND provision in schools.

[Ben Coleman (Chelsea and Fulham) (Lab)]

18. What steps she is taking to improve SEND provision in schools.

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

Our new SEND system will deliver a fully inclusive mainstream education, supported by £4 billion of investment. This Labour Government are tackling one of the thorniest problems that the previous Government left behind, with compassion, investment and reform. Children with special educational needs will access targeted and specialist support through a clear national framework, with individual support plans and stronger education, health and care plans for children with complex needs. We will work with education and health staff to prioritise early intervention and cross-service collaboration to ensure better outcomes for children nationwide.

[Josh Newbury]

I have spoken with teachers and special educational needs and disabilities co-ordinators across Cannock Chase, so I know that many schools, such as Longford primary in Cannock and St Joseph’s primary in Rugeley, already have SEND hubs, but with no additional funding, they cannot offer the holistic, teacher-led support they would like to. Can the Secretary of State confirm that local authorities will be given funding to commission specialist bases to finally give many children with SEND needs the support that will allow them to thrive in their local school?

[Bridget Phillipson]

Yes, I am happy to give my hon. Friend that commitment. We will ensure that every secondary school, and a similar number of primary schools, have that kind of support, and we will work with local authorities to set up specialist bases. As part of our £3.7 billion high-need capital investment, we will create 60,000 new specialist places nationwide to make sure that more children get the specialist support they deserve. I encourage parents and staff in his constituency and across Cannock Chase to share their views during the consultation period.

Support for Dyslexic Pupils

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Tuesday 11th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to speak with you in the chair, Ms Butler. I thank and pay tribute to the hon. Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance), not only for his powerful speech drawing on his deep personal experience, but for his steadfast campaigning in this place. He is a strong advocate for children and adults with dyslexia. My hon. Friend the Member for Broxtowe (Juliet Campbell) should also be given credit for her fantastic speech, particularly her call for a national dyslexia strategy, which I echo.

When I speak to people in my constituency, often self-employed or small business owners, I am struck by how many are very open about their experiences going through school with an unidentified learning disability, often dyslexia. Many say they felt stupid, and many were actively treated that way, yet what they needed was not dumbing down; it was simple and more inclusive, tailored ways of working. They have gone on to thrive in professions that they have a talent for, which I think shows us two things: that dyslexia does not limit what you can go on to achieve despite how limiting it can feel in a restrictive school environment, and that we as a nation are missing out on a wealth of talent and success if we fail to give children with dyslexia support in their formative years.

The Government’s “Curriculum and Assessment Review” is an important and ambitious step towards ensuring that every young person in this country benefits from a rich education. It is an ambitious, evidence-led piece of work led by Professor Becky Francis, which rightly recognises the importance of equipping young people with the skills and understanding they need to thrive in a rapidly changing world. The review makes it clear that the curriculum must work for all pupils, and not just those who fit neatly within traditional measures of attainment. I confess that I was one of those highly academic schoolchildren, but in a way, that made me more acutely aware that I was in a minority and that much of school life did not inspire my peers in the way it did me.

The review emphasises inclusion, high expectations for all learners, and the need for a coherent system that supports both academic and personal development—principles that I am sure every Member of this House welcomes. However, if we are to truly build a world-class curriculum, it must work for children and young people in all our schools. One area where we can clearly go much further is the experience of those with dyslexia.

As we have heard, one in 10 children in the UK is thought to have dyslexia. For many of them, the difference between thriving and struggling depends not on ability, but crucially on whether their needs are recognised early and supported effectively. While the review refers to special educational needs and disabilities more broadly, it does not explicitly mention dyslexia, and I hope that will be addressed by the Department as it responds to Professor Francis’s findings. We cannot afford to overlook the very real challenges these learners face in a system still too reliant on one-size-fits-all assessments.

Charities like the British Dyslexia Association and Made By Dyslexia are clear that we must strengthen teacher training, ensure early identification and screening, and expand access to assistive technologies that will help pupils to demonstrate their knowledge without being held back by barriers in reading or writing. They also remind us that dyslexic thinking, creativity, problem-solving and innovation are skills our modern economy needs, and that we should celebrate them.

These are not criticisms of the review, but opportunities to build on its work. Its commitment to evidence-based reform, professional development and raising standards aligns perfectly with the goals of improving support for neurodiverse and dyslexic learners. By embedding dyslexia awareness and practical strategies into teacher training and curriculum design, we can ensure that every child is able to access and benefit from the knowledge our curriculum seeks to deliver. I therefore welcome the review’s ambitions and ask the Minister for School Standards to ensure, as I am sure she will, that as implementation begins, the Department works closely with charities, schools and experts to ensure that inclusion is not just a noble principle, but the lived reality in every classroom.

Children’s Social Care

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Thursday 30th October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

It is a real pleasure to speak in this debate. As this is the first debate in which I have spoken with the Minister in his place, I warmly welcome him to his new role. I know that he brings an immense amount of professional and personal experience to this role. It is always wonderful to see somebody on the Front Bench who can bring that experience to bear, and who understands where many of us are coming from in what we say. I am honoured to follow excellent speeches from the Chair of the Education Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), and from my other hon. Friends. I echo the thanks to the Select Committee for all its work, and for the long list of fantastic recommendations, which show it has its finger on the pulse of what is being raised and requested in the whole children’s social care sector.

I speak not just as a Member of Parliament with a keen interest in children’s social care but as somebody who is personally invested in this topic as an adoptive parent and a former foster carer. The Committee’s report made very clear what many of us see in our constituencies and from our families and friendship circles: a widening gap between those who are willing to adopt and foster and those who are able to complete the process. My hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood outlined some statistics around that, which are really concerning, particularly as somebody who has been through this process. Those like me have seen the difficulties that are faced throughout the process, but also how it is at the end of the tunnel, as it were. It is worrying that so many people do not reach that point, and we need to drill down into what is putting off so many people.

Recruitment of foster carers and adopters cannot be limited to local campaigns. We need a national drive on this, and to make it a national mission. We need central Government to commit resources and efforts to this issue. We are seeing a worrying downward trend in the number of foster carers and adopters. We know the cost of that, which is not only the financial cost—with, as the Chair of the Committee said, hugely increasing numbers of private children’s homes opening—but the social cost to children: many of them feel that there is nowhere for them to go and they are not wanted by anybody. We know that a foster placement, in particular, can offer so much healing and restore a young person’s sense of self and their confidence in the whole system.

When my partner and I applied, we got a lot of our initial information from charities, before we even inquired about an information evening at our local authority. Particularly with ongoing funding challenges, councils are quite limited in what they can do. Staffordshire county council does fantastic work; it has been to many local fairs—when we had a Pride in Cannock Chase it came there with its fostering van, and proactively spoke to people. But obviously it can only do so much, and many of the staff are volunteering their own time to be able to do that.

We also need to look at some of the practical barriers, particularly around things like people in social housing, as was highlighted by the Committee. We clearly do not have a lack of altruistic people in this country who want to put themselves forward to foster, adopt or both. But the dropping numbers suggest that there are many barriers in place that we need to knock down. Fostering and adoption are not luxuries; they are absolute lifelines. Children need stable and loving homes, so we need accessible routes for families to come forward.

I will briefly pick up on the point about priority school admission for kinship carers. I have personal experience of the benefit that having priority admission as an adoptive parent gave us. Unlike most adopted children, whose parents are applying for a school nearby, many children who are going into kinship care are moving further away from home, and I have seen cases where they struggle to get a school place. I appreciate that in its response the Department said that there is limited evidence around that. However, we know that there is limited evidence around a lot of the challenges that are facing kinship carers, because we are only recently waking up to their importance, value and support needs. I hope the Department will do everything it can to gather that evidence and look to see if this is something we can do.

Thirdly, as other colleagues have, I will touch on the adoption and special guardianship support fund. Again, I declare an interest in that as a family we are actively accessing this fund for my daughter. I welcome the Department’s acknowledgment that stability and transparency are critical. As has been said in debates in this Chamber and on the Floor of the House, any support that we can provide through the fund will pay for itself many times over. But we also need to look at the capacity in local authorities to provide support.

As a family we have sometimes found that finding a therapist—often a former social worker who has particular expertise in different areas—can be a challenge. Clearly, local authorities are not going to be able to provide the full gambit of support that might be needed, but for issues such as attachment disorder, which is very common among children in care, it would be wonderful to see more of that support available within local authorities, so that we do not have to use the ASGSF or go out to private providers or charities to access that support.

I will touch on the recruitment and retention of social workers, as my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood did. We hear continually from social workers about how there is immense instability in the workforce, and that is undermining everything that they are trying to do, from early intervention to post-adoption support and preparing care leavers. We know that this is a challenge for almost every local authority in the country. A national workforce strategy is critical. We need to offer meaningful career progression and improved pay in many areas—pay disparities even between neighbouring local authorities can be huge.

I have heard about the difference between Birmingham and Worcestershire, for example, and many social workers being sucked out of the counties that ring the west midlands conurbation into those urban authorities because they can pay much better. They therefore often have better staff teams, whereas those in the surrounding shires are struggling. Many newly qualified social workers do not have the mentorship and support from more experienced colleagues, so they are leaving not long into their career, which is tragic. Stress and workforce pressures will always be there for social workers as it is an incredibly demanding job, but anything we can do to foster a culture that values and uplifts social work, and that means that people have some of the trickier tasks taken away—for example, so they do not have to fill out as much paperwork—would help.

Finally, I will touch on care leavers and the need for a universal support offer. We have repeatedly heard heartbreaking stories of care leavers aged 18, or even 16, moving out of their local authority and often losing support. That is why a national care offer would be a catch-all across the country. Staying Close provisions are really welcome, but they need to be fully rolled out so that we can smoothly transition young adults to independence with emotional and practical support intact. It cannot be a postcode lottery. I have heard from many care leavers that they want to move out of their home authority—they may have done so when they were a young child—but they often remain reliant on the original local authority in which they were taken into care for support. Those local authorities are often far less likely to offer support to someone living far outside their area.

There was also a recent announcement on care leavers and student loans. It would be great if the Minister could provide more information around that, because my understanding is that care leavers already have independent student status and can therefore already get maximum loans in all but a small number of cases. I have been asked to seek a bit more clarity on that so we can see who that announcement will benefit and whether there is any data on that.

I echo my thanks to the Education Committee and the Department for all their work on this, but highlight the need for a national recruitment campaign for foster carers and adopters; as much support as possible for adoptive parents and kinship carers to do their absolute best for their loved ones; a well supported, sustainable social-work workforce; and a care leaver offer that transcends geography, so that young people can access what they need, wherever they are.

Children with SEND: Assessments and Support

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Monday 15th September 2025 Westminster Hall

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Dr Huq. I thank the hon. Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) for her brilliant speech, and I thank the petitioners.

Over the summer, like many hon. Members, I hosted a SEND coffee morning. From those 25 parents, I heard stories of not only love, resilience and determination, but a system they feel is all too often rigged against them. Again and again, I heard about services that do not speak to one another and processes that feel confusing and adversarial. The impact on parents’ mental health and relationships, and on children’s ability to learn and make friends, is real.

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

In line with my hon. Friend’s experience, I have heard from numerous families in Mansfield who have engaged in long battles to obtain EHCPs for their children. Many of them are utterly exhausted by the process, and often they are not offered the support that they are legally entitled to within the statutory timelines. Does he agree that such delays are completely unacceptable, and that they must change?

[Josh Newbury]

I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. I, too, have heard many examples of families who feel that they have had to work almost full time to manage their children’s EHCP processes, and even of some relationships that have broken down because of the strain—on top of the strains that already come with supporting a SEND child.

Parents also constantly raised the issue of waiting times. One mum in Wimblebury told me that she started the process for her daughter in reception but did not get an EHCP until just before she started year 7—and even then only with intensive support from one of our fantastic local councillors, Julie Aston. In fairness to Staffordshire county council, it faces an increase in the number of EHCP applications from around 600 a year up to 2019 to over 2,000 now, but after such a wait, too many children are left with an EHCP drafted by someone who has never even met them.

Another shocking reality is the profiteering that fills the void where state provision falls woefully short: the most expensive placement in my constituency is £166,000 for a single school year. Now, the last thing I would call for is to take the support away from that child—I hope that they are thriving in that setting—but it should shame us that ever more expensive private provision is the only way of meeting the spiralling need.

I have three practical asks rooted in what families have told me. First, we need a fair funding model that is based on need, not postcode. A child supported through the high needs block in Staffordshire receives less than £1,000, but in Camden a child gets more than £3,500. That discrepancy is not defensible. Secondly, we need true multi-agency working in practice—with a single front door for shared assessments, clear escalation routes and shared records—so that parents do not have to retell their story over and over.

[Simon Hoare (North Dorset) (Con)]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[Josh Newbury]

I will proceed with my speech in the interest of time.

Thirdly, on transparent timings, we need to meet statutory deadlines, publish a dashboard of local waiting times and outcomes, and co-produce communications with parent-carer forums using clear, respectful and up-to-date language.

I could say reams more on things such as off-rolling and intermediate support, but I will end with this request: let us rebuild a SEND system with people, not processes, at the heart of its provision and with good communication and joined-up services as the norm. We can do better than this—and for the future of the children and young people stuck in a failing system, we must.

Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Thursday 4th September 2025 Westminster Hall

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

I thank the hon. Member for Mid Sussex (Alison Bennett) for securing the debate.

I begin by declaring that as a family, we will begin using the adoption and special guardianship support fund from next week, so this is current and personal for me. As I am about to find out, the ASGSF is a lifeline for thousands of families like mine up and down the country. Education is where this matters so much. Despite changing attitudes, better training and awareness in schools, and innovations such as the pupil premium, too many adopted children and children in special guardianships still fall behind. If we give them the right support early, however, we can give them an equal start in school and the same opportunity to learn, make friends and feel comfortable in the classroom.

It is important to give that view on how much difference this £50 million, and many other sources of support, make for families like mine, because if we listened only to Liberal Democrat MPs today, we might, regrettably, lose sight of that. I very much welcome the Minister’s statement today that the ASGSF will continue for another year. However, I hope that the Department will still consider multi-year certainty, which would benefit families, providers and local authorities hugely.

[Ruth Cadbury]

Is my hon. Friend as concerned as I am that we are hearing that some adopters, or potential adopters, are being put off going even through the process because of concerns about a lack of post-adoption support, which of course has to be long term, as he just mentioned?

[Josh Newbury]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. When my husband and I were going through the adoption journey and had our training and information evenings, the post-adoption support offer was very much part of that. If families feel that they cannot take that step because they fear they will be unable to get support, that is a great concern. I know that the Minister is also concerned about that.

I also know that the Minister will be carefully considering the impact of changes made to the ASGSF in April this year. The £3,000 fair access limit will, for some, be enough, but last year, almost half of children received more than that, reflecting the often complex needs assisted by the fund.

As we look ahead, I urge the Minister to see what can be done to build in flexibility. I hear that families often cannot access the fund quickly enough, so they reach crisis point and sadly, in some cases, placements break down. Quite apart from the devastating impact of breakdowns on families, the cost to local authorities is immense.

The ASGSF must be part of a holistic, early-help model, not crisis care. If at all possible, we also need look at how assessment costs are funded, particularly for complex cases where need is greater and for families in financial hardship. This House has always been united on one thing: children deserve stable, loving homes and the support to make sure that those remain their forever homes. By building on what we have now, we can ensure that the fund continues to support families and remains fit for the future.

Giving Every Child the Best Start in Life

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Wednesday 16th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

It is a privilege to contribute to today’s debate on giving children the best possible start in life. As a father, this is an issue that matters deeply to me, not just politically but personally. We all understand that our experiences in our first years shape the adults we go on to become. The memories formed in those formative years, whether of joy and love or challenge and neglect, stay with us for life. They shape our confidence, our relationships and our view of the world.

I am sure all of us in this Chamber have had the privilege of going into schools and speaking to children about what they want to be when they grow up. What a privilege that is, and what a responsibility it gives us to ensure that today’s children can dream just as big as we did, and feel just as supported in reaching those dreams. That is why it is vital that we do everything we can to make sure that every child, no matter their background, gets the same sense of possibility, the same support and the same opportunities to thrive. I know that I want that for my children.

I am proud that this Labour Government are committed to rolling out Best Start family hubs. These hubs, along with the children’s centres that already exist such as the fantastic West Chadsmoor family centre in my constituency, provide vital wraparound support for families, offering everything from early education to parenting advice and mental health support. The announcement earlier this year of a new school-based nursery at Heath Hayes primary academy is another proud example of how we are supporting children in my towns and villages.

As an adoptive parent and foster carer, I want to take a moment to speak directly to the needs of some of our most vulnerable children—those who grow up in the care system. In Staffordshire alone, the county council supports over 5,000 children, of whom 1,345 are in care. Because of the sadly increasing demand, the council has faced dramatic financial pressures, overspending by nearly £3.8 million, largely as a result of the costs of placing children in care. These figures underline the scale of the demand and the commitment needed to meet it.

I am an evangelical advocate for fostering to adopt, also known as early permanence, and I should declare an interest because that is the path that I have taken in adopting my children. Fostering to adopt allows vulnerable children to move into stable, loving homes as soon as possible, avoiding the uncertainty and disruption that all too often characterise life in care. I would like to put on record my personal thanks to the Minister for Children and Families, my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham East (Janet Daby), for also being a strong advocate on this, and for giving her time to me today to discuss early permanence and support for fostered and adopted children.

Evidence shows that early intervention, especially when speech and language support is provided before six months old, leads to lasting gains in expressive vocabulary, social and emotional development, and communication outcomes. Enrolment in support before three months, for example, delivers measurable gains in vocabulary at 18 to 24 months and even helps to close gaps with hearing peers by age five. Children in care are just as full of potential as any other child, but they need us in this place to fight a little harder for them, to make sure that they too, when asked “What do you want to be when you grow up?”, have the support they need around them to achieve whatever those dreams might be.

Labour is delivering the biggest overhaul of legislation to protect children in a generation, because where others dither and kick political footballs, we on this side of the House will always act decisively to look after the most vulnerable.

[Adam Jogee]

Just before my hon. Friend comes to the end of his important remarks, I am sure the whole House will want to thank him and his family for leading by example, not just by showing care and compassion but by bringing that life experience to this place.

[Josh Newbury]

Thank you. I really appreciate that from my hon. Friend. I think that everybody who puts themselves forward to be an adopter or a foster carer does so with a huge amount of compassion. It is a journey that is often fraught with difficulty, and it certainly presents its challenges, but I think that all parenthood does. Sometimes we need to recognise that parents, no matter how they come to their parenthood, are doing an awful lot to make sure that the next generation thrives—which is, after all, why we are all here today.

This Government are putting in place massive support for kinship carers, with £44 million invested in kinship and foster carers and a new kinship allowance being trialled to provide financial stability to those stepping up to care for children in their wider family. Our national kinship care ambassador is working with local authorities to improve support and permanence pathways, and that is very welcome. Together with the child poverty taskforce, which will report in the autumn, and the expansion of free school meals, these measures underpin our mission to lift 100,000 children out of poverty, because no child should go hungry into their classroom.

By investing in family hubs where families in Cannock Chase and beyond can access wraparound support, by rolling out early intervention programmes that build children’s language and confidence from birth, and by prioritising early permanence and fostering to adopt for children in the care system, we can deliver on the promise of giving every child—not just some—the best possible start in life and the opportunity to make the most of their potential. Every child deserves love, stability and opportunity. Whether they dream of becoming a doctor, a teacher or even a Member of Parliament, it is our duty to ensure that those dreams are possible and to allow every child to make the most of their gifts and potential.

Educational Attainment of Boys

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Thursday 10th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland (Sam Rushworth) for securing today’s debate. As others have done, I start by saying that the numbers are stark. By almost every measure, boys are falling behind. By the end of primary school, just 57% of boys meet the expected standard in English and maths, compared with 64% of girls. For a white, working-class boy from a low-income household, that picture is even bleaker. Just 33% of those eligible for free school meals meet that same benchmark at GCSE.

[Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for his speech. The educational attainment of boys is a serious concern, and I agree with him that it is principally a class issue. Working-class boys are further behind in their GCSEs and face higher NEET rates and exclusion rates, with a lower rate of those going on to HE. Does my hon. Friend agree that to prevent crime and antisocial behaviour and to deal with wider economic issues, we need to see early intervention and targeted support for working-class boys?

[Josh Newbury]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and I will come on to many of the issues that he refers to. He represents a community with a demographic that is similar in many ways to my own, so I very much welcome his efforts in this space.

In Staffordshire, as across the country, boys are around 50% more likely to be excluded than girls, and twice as likely to be permanently excluded. We have to work out why that is happening, and why so many of our boys and young men feel out of place in the classroom and in school, and subsequently rebel against the system.

As the first in my family to attend university, I know that our education system, particularly after the incredibly damaging reforms of a certain former Education Secretary, all too often feels like it is one size fits all. That is a particular barrier to opportunity for white, working-class boys, who often do not see themselves reflected in school. Cannock Chase sadly falls significantly behind the national average, with just 23% of over-16s receiving a higher education qualification, compared with 34% nationally. In ’22-23, 34% of men from Staffordshire had started in higher education by the age of 19, compared with 49% of women.

As a man raised to be a proud feminist, the fact that the rate and numbers of women going to university have increased hugely since first overtaking those of men in the mid-’90s should absolutely be welcomed. It should not be seen, in any way, as something that is taking away from men, as it is sometimes falsely characterised. In recognising that, however, we must not ignore the fact that the rate and numbers of men going on to higher education have risen much more slowly. Even more stark is the fact that 22% of young people in Cannock Chase leave school with no qualifications at all, and only 57% of white boys from Staffordshire met the expected standard in English reading and writing and maths last year.

For young boys, those are not just statistics; they are social problems. We must also recognise the danger of ignoring a growing crisis among boys—when they feel alienated from school and opportunity, others step in to fill that gap. Most worryingly, that includes the rise of toxic figures on social media who spread misogyny. Young boys are being fed a version of masculinity built not on resilience, education and kindness, but on dominance, grievance and hatred. As has been said, if we shame men as a whole, or characterise all of them as privileged, we not only fail to address this issue but push many boys towards those malign influences and risk losing a generation to that toxicity.

I welcome the fact that the Government are working to address the root causes of violence against women and girls in schools, teaching pupils about healthy relationships and consent. We need to draw boys into education by showing them that it matters, and that they matter. We need to show them that they will play a role in our society, and that learning is not just for the academically gifted and the privileged. We must invest in mentoring, mental health and early intervention. We must back apprenticeships, technical pathways and, as a society, value them as much as we do degrees. We must understand why so many men are walking away from education and training. Is it a lack of support or financial pressures? Whatever the cause, it deserves real scrutiny from this House and real solutions.

We must also explore reforming assessment methods, because not every young person thrives in a system built around high-stakes exams. Coursework, modular learning and vocational achievements must be valued equally, as they were when I was at school. Above all, as we have done today, we must talk about this openly, honestly and with urgency. We have to inspire boys to stay and thrive in education, and—as my hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland so eloquently put it—not shame them or make out that they have privilege when they have anything but. Instead, we must guide them towards a future defined not by anger or exclusion but by achievement and respect.

Water Safety Education

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Thursday 19th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton Itchen (Darren Paffey) for securing today’s debate, particularly during Drowning Prevention Week. I will speak of not just the risks of wild and open-water swimming, but the enormous benefits that it can offer when done safely and responsibly.

Specifically, I would like to address concerns about the lake at the former Shoal Hill quarry—which is in the neighbouring constituency of Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge—and about Chasewater reservoir. Although that reservoir falls within the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson), it is a much-loved site that is frequently used by many of my constituents, particularly those in my home village of Norton Canes. They feel a very strong sense of ownership over what was, for many years before a rebrand, known as the Norton pool. My hon. Friend had hoped to be here today, but due to constituency commitments, he has not been able to join us for this debate. However, he shares the concerns I will raise about Chasewater in his constituency.

As the evenings grow longer and the days get warmer, places such as Shoal Hill quarry and Chasewater become popular destinations for families seeking to cool off. Appealing though it may be, the risks of swimming in dangerous bodies of water can strike anyone. They including cold water shock, currents that drag people down due to the depth of the water, rip currents that drag people away from the shore, a lack of safe exits from the water, cuts caused by hidden objects underwater, a lack of preparation or ways to call for help, and aftershock. Being safe and well prepared before swimming is crucial. According to the National Water Safety Forum, an average of 19 people a year drown when swimming in open water, and I know that every Member in the Chamber today would want to make sure that none of our constituents becomes one of those 19.

Tragically, six years ago, a 21-year-old man drowned in Chasewater while saving a nine-year-old girl from the water. His bravery should not be forgotten, nor should the circumstances that led to such a loss. From memory, I believe that this incident involved an inflatable like the ones used in swimming pools, which—in deep water and with high winds—was pulled some 30 to 40 metres out into the reservoir. However, later that summer and in summers since, we have again seen young children on inflatables in Chasewater. I know I might come across as being a killjoy, but this is genuinely a threat to life, especially for children. As such, I take this opportunity to urge my constituents not to swim in Chasewater—unless it is with an open water swimming group, which I will come to later.

At Shoal Hill quarry near Cannock, too, it is simply not safe to enter the water. Risks lie hidden beneath the surface, including sharp debris, submerged machinery and toxic contaminants. Weed beds and rubbish create an unforeseen web of entanglement, while sheer sudden drop-offs along the quarry floor can turn a step into a deadly fall. But this is not about discouraging people from enjoying the outdoors—quite the opposite. When open water swimming is done properly, it can be incredibly rewarding. People can stay safer while open water swimming by checking the weather, being aware of where to exit the water, making sure they have kit prepared, wearing a brightly coloured swimming cap, and knowing their gear.

Chasewater’s open water swimming groups offer one-to-one coaching, compulsory tow floats, and the National Open Water Coaching Association’s safety system. That wristband system allows immediate access to emergency details. With safety and training of this kind available, people can enjoy open water swimming and trust that they will be safe while doing so. I also pay tribute to all the other businesses and groups that provide safe activities on Chasewater, including Chasewater Activity Centre, Chase Watersports Centre, Pier 52 Watersports and the Chase Sailing Club.

With the beautiful hot weather upon us, it is vital that we continue to talk about ways to make wild water swimming as safe as possible. By increasing awareness and educating people in high-risk areas, we can start to bring down the number of these tragedies. No one should lose their life from a moment of fun, and no family should suffer the grief of a death that could have been prevented. This is not about stopping people enjoying the outdoors, whether at Chasewater, Shoal Hill quarry or anywhere else across the United Kingdom; it is about giving them the information and tools they need to do so safely and confidently.

Oral Answers to Questions

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Monday 16th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Catherine McKinnell]

I agree that we need to take a constructive and collaborative approach in how we improve outcomes for all children, and intervene in children’s lives to ensure their needs are met at the earliest stage possible. We will support schools to do that in any way we can. I would be more than happy to engage with the right hon. Gentleman on his constructive suggestion.

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

13. What steps she is taking to reduce the time taken for the adoption of children in foster care.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Janet Daby)]

Where adoption is the right option for children, it needs to happen without delay, and early permanence placements are a crucial way to offer children stability. Labour believes that children growing up in our country deserve the best start in life, which is why we have provided £250,000 in funding for Adoption England to promote the practice. The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill represents the biggest overhaul of children’s social care in a generation, and it is a shame that Opposition Members opposed it.

[Josh Newbury]

I thank the Minister for that response. As an adoptive parent and a foster carer, I know the transformative effect that early permanence can have on the lives of children in care. It is not right for every child or for every parent, but adoption agencies could make much wider use of it. Would the Minister be willing to meet me and adoption charities to discuss how we can maximise the benefits of early permanence?

[Janet Daby]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this important topic; he is a champion for children in Cannock Chase. I agree that we should continue to promote early permanence. Adoption England has published national standards to promote and shape early permanence practice across the country. I regularly meet the organisations my hon. Friend has mentioned, but I am more than happy to meet him, too.