Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Lord Scriven Excerpts

Thursday 1st May 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Scriven (LD)]

My Lords, it is truly with joy and pleasure that I follow the speech of my noble friend Lord Mohammed of Tinsley, someone whom I have known for over half a century and whom I am proud to call not just a political colleague but a personal friend. It is not often that the noble Lord, Lord Blunkett, and I find ourselves in agreement—in fact, it usually signals that something truly extraordinary has happened in Sheffield. So I say to my noble friend, “You have really raised the bar on who you can bring together in your first speech, so I look forward to you solving the Ukraine crisis in your second”.

I met my noble friend back in the early 2000s, when he was standing for what can only be described—I am being generous here—as a no-hope council seat. I was dispatched to give him a bit of morale boosting, which is always a delicate task when you know full well that the poor soul is likely to come a very distant runner-up. Even then, his spark was obvious—his passion, persistence and, most of all, the principles that have stayed with him throughout his remarkable career.

As it turned out, our political journeys have continued in tandem. My noble friend was eventually elected as a councillor for Broomhill—the same ward I represented. He later served as a vital member of my cabinet in Sheffield and, if we are claiming for political sides the university technical college of Sheffield, I am pleased to say that that was during our administration. When he was in my cabinet, he was always driven by a fierce commitment to tackling inequality, and was endlessly constructive and an immensely valued colleague.

My noble friend’s journey from unloading lorries for £27.50 a week to his youth work—I point out with a sense of irony that we now have within your Lordships’ House our own resident youth worker, who I am sure we can use at our disposal if we require his diversionary tactics and services—to representing Yorkshire in the European Parliament, and now to these red Benches, reminds us of the very best of Britain: a country where opportunity, public service and determination can take someone from the YTS scheme to the House of Lords.

If there were ever a voice needed in this Chamber to speak for youth, fairness and equal opportunity with that no-nonsense, straight-talking Sheffield spirit, it is his. I, for one, am really glad that he now sits behind me, or rather beside me—

[Noble Lords]

Oh!

[Lord Scriven (LD)]

I am used to having him behind me, heckling, but now he sits beside me in your Lordships’ House. I wish him well in his endeavours and I am sure he will add to our work here in this Parliament.

Turning to the Bill, I want to talk about the provisions that address the issue of illegal, unregistered schools. A liberal society can and must accommodate a wide range of educational settings, including independent schools and properly regulated home education as well as, of course, state schools. However, in accommodating such education, the wishes of parents and religious groups need to be balanced against the rights of the child. I therefore broadly welcome the measures within the Bill that are aimed at ensuring that all children can have their right to a broad education, adequately protected.

Although no precise figures are known for the number of children currently in unregistered schools, the former chief inspector of Ofsted, Amanda Spielman, estimated it was likely to be in the “tens of thousands”. She described conditions in some that

“you wouldn’t want to put a dog in, let alone a child”.

Earlier this year, a report from the Jewish Policy Research Institute found that over 6,600 children in ultra-orthodox Jewish communities were not attending registered schools, suggesting that many are being sent to unregistered faith schools, which represents the same pattern in other religious faith groups. These are concerning figures, given the repeated findings that many unregistered religious schools fail to deliver tuition in subjects outside religious instruction, denying students skills vital to a successful and fulfilling life, with some pupils even left unable to write English. Moreover, the existence of unregistered schools poses a significant safeguarding risk. Evidence has documented children being taught in deplorable conditions, alongside instances of physical and sexual abuse and an alarming absence of safeguarding procedures.

The kind of religious education offered in these settings typically lacks a broad and balanced perspective on a range of beliefs. Instead, it tends to indoctrinate children and young people with a narrow religious worldview. These limited perspectives undermine the ability of pupils to engage with communities outside those in which they are being educated—an important aspect of life in modern Britain. I take this opportunity to acknowledge the work of the National Secular Society—I refer to my interests in the register—which was one of the first organisations to raise awareness of the plight of pupils languishing in such unregistered schools.

Every child, irrespective of their parents’ religious outlook, deserves access to a safe and nurturing learning environment that fosters critical thinking and respect for a diverse set of beliefs. Every child, regardless of their background, should have their independent right to a safe, broad and balanced education respected.

Finally, I note that the Bill removes the existing presumption that a new school will automatically be an academy. This change means that new faith-based schools will not necessarily be subject to the 50% cap that limits religious selection in newly established, faith-based free schools’ admissions arrangements—a measure introduced to promote diversity, inclusion and fairness. It is my sincere hope that this House will ensure that a Bill intended to eliminate barriers to educational opportunities does not inadvertently create new barriers in the form of more faith schools applying 100% religious selection. Such an outcome would undermine equality and freedoms, and the choice of families within communities that do not share the same religious beliefs as the school.