Secure 16 to 19 Academies Bill

Lord Bach Excerpts

Friday 24th October 2025 Lords Chamber

Moved by

[Lord Bach]

That the Bill be now read a second time.

[Lord Bach (Lab)]

My Lords, this is a short, two-clause Bill, but an important one, aimed at amending existing legislation underpinning new secure 16 to 19 academies, otherwise known as secure schools. It comes from the other place, where my honourable friend Emma Foody, the Member of Parliament for Cramlington and Killingworth, sponsored the Bill. In the other place, it enjoyed the support of all parties.

Secure schools are a new form of custody for children and young people. The last Government acted to establish secure 16 to 19 academies in legislation; this Bill will make further necessary amendments to the Academies Act 2010 to make specific provisions in that Act relevant to the establishment of new secure schools.

I will say a word about the background. In 2016, Charlie Taylor published his important review of the youth justice system. The report made a number of important recommendations, including the need, shared by all, to reimagine how we care for children who commit serious enough offences to warrant detaining them in custody. His proposal was to create a new type of custodial environment, focused on the delivery of education and offering children the opportunity to gain the skills and qualifications necessary to prepare them for their release into the community. The Taylor review made a compelling case for change. Transforming the environments in which we detain and provide care for these children is as necessary now as it was then.

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 established secure schools in legislation as secure 16 to 19 academies under the Academies Act 2010, and secure children’s homes under the Children’s Homes (England) Regulations 2015. This Bill is now needed to make further amendments in the 2010 Act relevant to secure 16 to 19 academies. The proposed changes cover the termination period in which government continues to fund the secure school, should there be a need to end a funding agreement into which it has entered, as Section 2 of the Academies Act 2010 says, for a secure school. The Bill will also amend the duties placed on providers that enter into funding agreements with the Government prior to opening a secure school. These changes will provide for better and more integrated services.

The Bill consists of three measures. First, it will amend Section 2 of the 2010 Act to reduce the notice period for termination of a funding agreement under Section 2(2) of the 2010 Act from seven to two years for secure 16 to 19 academies. A two-year period will enable government to prioritise value for money for the taxpayer and have more flexibility should there be any need to terminate a funding agreement with a secure school provider. Reducing this to two years in this case strikes a balance between avoiding a lengthy exit period, in which government would be committed to continuing to fund the secure school longer than necessary, and ensuring that secure school providers have the certainty of funding to avoid issues with recruiting and retaining the specialist staff required to work in this environment. The Government remain able to terminate funding agreements with secure school providers in the event of poor performance.

Secondly, the Bill will disapply Section 9 of the 2010 Act for secure 16 to 19 academies. This requires that the Secretary of State considers the impact of entering into a new academy funding agreement on other educational establishments in the area. While it is of course important that secure schools are registered as academies to ensure they mirror best practice in the community, they are fundamentally different, as secure schools do not compete with other schools.

Thirdly, the Bill will amend Section 10 of the 2010 Act, which currently requires that an academy provider consults appropriate persons on whether a funding agreement should be entered into. We recognise the importance of considering the impact on local communities when opening any new school. The Bill will amend that section to require the provider to consult appropriate persons on how the secure school should work with local partners, such as elected representatives or health and education services.

By supporting the Bill, the House would have an opportunity to create better services and thus strengthen the impact of secure schools on the lives of children within our justice system. I very much hope that colleagues across the House, as they did in the other place, will give this Bill their full support. I beg to move.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Bach (Lab)]

My Lords, seldom have I heard such unanimity in this House in any debate at any time over many years. I warmly thank all those who have taken part in this important debate. It is important, because this is such a crucial subject for our country and our future. I particularly thank the Minister for her remarks and for the Government’s support for this Private Member’s Bill. Because of the unanimity, I want to say very little at this stage, except to say thank you.

I want to make just a couple of points. One is to agree with the noble Lord, Lord Bates, whose speech I was particularly impressed by. The amount of work that had gone into the research that he had done into this subject was very impressive. The point about continuity in criminal justice policy seems one we have forgotten about for too long. Of course political parties must be free to discuss all issues that affect people, but in criminal justice, where there is automatic opposition from one side or another, it sometimes seems like a real barrier to progress. If we can act in agreement, as we have today at least, where all people of good will feel the same, then we should do so more often.

The only other point I want to make is that schemes such as this are expensive, obviously. They are bound to be and we should say that they are, but I think everyone in the House would agree that they are worth every penny if we can change the life of even one child—I hope many more than that—and give them every chance to lead a good, happy and successful life in the future. I beg to move.

Bill read a second time and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.