Student Loans

Luke Evans Excerpts

Wednesday 18th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Laura Trott]

My right hon. Friend is absolutely right: there is nothing progressive about letting a young person take a university degree that has negative returns for them. That is not fair or right, and we should fix it.

The problem is not just the loans, but a system that funnels young people into university courses that do not get them jobs and do not allow them to repay their loans. The Institute for Fiscal Studies says that 30% of university degrees have negative returns for those who study them. It is not just that they do not help, but that they have negative returns. It is worse for those students to go to university—that is not progressive.

Some 75% of the value of loans for creative arts courses is not paid back. Creative arts is an engine of the UK economy, but too many courses just do not deliver jobs in the industry that they purport to serve. It is a mis-selling scandal where brochures promise a glittering career, but the courses deliver nothing but debt and a dead end. That is not right. Of course, creative arts courses that actually lead to jobs should continue, but those who are selling a lie do not have any place being taxpayer funded.

The consequences of this broken system are already becoming clear. According to the Centre for Social Justice, more than 700,000 graduates are currently out of work and claiming benefits. That should concern every Member of this House.

[Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)]

Is my right hon. friend also concerned by the fact that, last year, the Office for National Statistics said that 257,000 people left the UK, up from an expected 77,000? Three quarters of those people were under the age of 35. That shows that young people are fleeing this country to look elsewhere for work. Does she share my concern that that is the case?

[Laura Trott]

My hon. Friend is, as ever, absolutely right. Opportunity should be created for young people here, not in other countries, and that is what we want to create.

--- Later in debate ---

[Georgia Gould]

Did the right hon. Member tell me who should not go to university? I can tell the Conservatives that when they close the drawbridge, it is pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds who will end up not at university. That is the consequence. We are opening up access to apprenticeships and vocational routes not by closing down university routes, but by opening up other routes.

[Dr Luke Evans]

The Opposition have made the argument that 30% of courses leave people with a negative bank balance. That is the problem that we are trying to solve. We are not denigrating anyone for wanting to choose; this is about ensuring that the quality of the course means that people have a positive life outcome, not a negative one. Does the Minister agree with that principle?

[Georgia Gould]

We are absolutely committed to driving up the quality of all university courses, and we are acting on that.

Conservative Members have attacked arts and creative courses as the areas where they would like to see a reduction. We have just seen the British talent at the Brits and the Oscars. This is one of our highest-growth industries. We saw this in our schools when there was a reduction in education in the arts, and we are seeing it now as the Conservatives attack those courses in universities.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)]

I have said this in the House before, but I will say it again: this is a Prime Minister who promised change and then changed his promise. On this subject, we only have to look at his 10-point plan from 2020. He said:

“My promise to you is that I will maintain our radical values and work tirelessly to get Labour in to power—so that we can advance the interests of the people our party was created to serve. Based on the moral case for socialism, here is where I stand.”

In point 2, he said:

“Support the abolition of tuition fees and invest in lifelong learning.”

He was right that Labour won a landslide election, but, strangely enough, that promise has gone.

[Alex McIntyre]

It was not in the manifesto.

[Dr Evans]

Exactly. It was not in the manifesto, and the Prime Minister made a promise. He made a promise when he stood to be Labour leader, and it was not there. Worse still, what did he do in his first Budget? He increased student fees from £9,250 to £9,535. And last year, he froze the thresholds. That is important, because he promised one thing and then changed his promise.

When it comes to student loans, we have heard a lot of tittle-tattle on both sides of the House, but all parties—including the Liberal Democrats, wherever they happen to be—have a responsibility. In 1998, it was Tony Blair who brought forward tuition fees. He then increased them in 2004. Then there was an increase in the coalition years, which the Liberal Democrats stood on an election manifesto not to do. And here we are now, having just been over what the Labour Government said they were going to do and now have done.

Does it really matter? Yes, there was an issue hidden in the plan 2 student loan, but it has come to fruition because of what we have seen across the globe. I do not think anyone was raising those concerns back then, but the Government have to deal with things that come up. That is what we are looking for today. That is what students outside this place will be listening for. Two years in, what is the solution? At the end of the day, it is the middle earners who are being squeezed. It is unfair, because no matter how hard they work, their debt is going up. Principally, regardless of our political position, I think we all agree that is unfair.

The question is how we solve it. When the Chancellor was asked that question, she said:

“So, yes, we want to fix it. Yes, we want to make improvements. But is it front of the queue? No, it’s not... Politics is about priorities. I’m not denying there is a problem. I’m not blind to that, but what I do say is there has to be some patience.”

Tell that to the hon. Member for Kettering (Rosie Wrighting) or the people from Hinckley and Bosworth whose debt, no matter what they do or how hard they earn, is going up.

[Chris Coghlan (Dorking and Horley) (LD)]

A constituent of mine, who aspires to be a GP, like the hon. Member, left university £44,000 in debt. She is actually paying more in interest than on her loan repayments. Does the hon. Member agree that the system deters graduates from following the very careers that we so desperately need them to follow in this country?

[Dr Evans]

The hon. Member is absolutely right. I expect his constituent will be shocked to hear that this is not a priority for the Government. It is unfair, which is why the Opposition at least tried to put up a solution. I was expecting the Government to turn around and say why it does not work, and perhaps offer us something different. That is what the public and his constituent want to hear, and certainly what mine do.

The Chancellor went on to say:

“If you say to me, ‘you shouldn’t have done child poverty and you should have reformed the student loan system,’ I just strongly disagree with that.”

Actually, that is very honest. I give her credit for that, but look at the wider context and what that means for younger people. As we have heard, unemployment in the UK is at its highest since 2021, and since 2015 for those aged 16 to 24. UK youth unemployment, for the first time ever, is above the European average. Let that sink in. As I said to my right hon. Friend the Member for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott), 257,000 people left the UK last year when it was expected to be 77,000, and three quarters of them were under the age of 35. Those people will not be recorded among the number of young people who are not in employment, education or training because NEET numbers are not calculated to include such cases. So not only do we have youth employment going up, but herds of young people are moving elsewhere. That is a tragedy for our economy and for those young people, because they are having to look elsewhere to find work, the lifestyle they want and their place in the world. To me, that is really sad.

What is the Government’s solution? They have already increased taxes on businesses, introduced more red tape and seen youth unemployment go up, and they have said to businesses, “Do you know what we are going to do? We are going to give you £3,000 to rehire the person who lost their job.” They have created a hole and they are now trying to fill it themselves, but they are only filling it halfway.

The Conservatives have set out a solution in the document that we have brought forward. Agreed, it does not fully cover the entire student loan system, and I agree with my hon. Friends that the whole approach needs to be carefully looked at, but at least the Conservatives are offering solutions and have time to develop them. The Government are having meetings and talking, but I see no solutions, and that is a shame.

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

I declare an interest as I am a former student with a plan 2 loan. I became a student during the first year that plan 2 loans were introduced. I remind hon. Members that I had a very tough Saturday job when I was growing up, in case anyone is shocked that I am indeed young enough to be a plan 2 student.

Frankly, I am shocked at the brass neck of Conservative Members. When I was at school, I remember having conversations with other working-class kids like me who were thinking about going to university—I was the first in my family—who were being put off because the Conservatives had put up the fees from £3,000 to £9,000. There was no consideration then for what young people were going through. There was no plan for young people, and certainly not for young people like me, who grew up in communities like the ones that I grew up in, with parents who never had the opportunities that all the Conservative Members at that time had got for free.

[Dr Luke Evans]

As a doctor, I was lucky enough to have funding to go towards my education, but I am always surprised to hear people saying that we should put more funding into students on the back of the porters and the receptionists who never went to university. It is those people’s taxes that are supporting those students—that 50% helped to get me where I am. What does the hon. Gentleman say to people like those in his community? They are the ones who are being left behind by paying their taxes for other people to have their time at university.

[Alex McIntyre]

The hon. Gentleman will be pleased that I am coming to exactly that point later in my speech.

Of course there are challenges with this system. There were challenges with it back when it was introduced in 2012. We pointed out the fact that there are huge generational inequalities: there are hon. Members present in the Chamber who did not pay tuition fees at all and had lower house prices when they graduated, so they could afford to buy a house. Those challenges continue, and part of the reason that I got into politics was to deal with those intergenerational inequalities. We all talk about broken promises, but what happened to the promise about levelling up? In my mind, levelling up was about creating more opportunities for young people in places like mine in Gloucester, but those opportunities were never delivered by the Conservatives.

I want what is best for young people and for the university sector in my constituency. I am delighted to be able to take this opportunity to welcome the brand new university campus that the University of Gloucestershire has opened in the city centre, taking over the Debenhams building and creating a new campus for students, with a public library, so that young people in Gloucester can see what that opportunity looks like going forward.

We need to ensure that we are creating opportunities for all young people, because despite the move towards more people going to university, only a third of people in Gloucestershire will go to university, and in the most deprived parts of my constituency, that number is fewer than one in five. That is why I am proud that the Government are introducing maintenance grants, and why I am backing the new target of two thirds of young people going to university or doing gold-standard apprenticeships, because university might not be the best route for everybody. Generations of young people in my community were left behind by the Conservatives, who had no plan in Government for young people in my constituency.

Minister for Men and Boys

Luke Evans Excerpts

Wednesday 25th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the potential merits of appointing a Minister for Men and Boys.

This is about men and women, not men or women. It is about boys and girls, not boys or girls. It is crucial to set that out from the start. John Gray was clear in his book, “Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus”. We all intrinsically know and feel that there are inherent differences in the way men and women deal with problems and have problems. Tony Blair spotted that women were struggling, and in May 1997 brought in a Minister for women to look across Government to try to sort out the problems facing women and girls.

From a Conservative perspective, this is ideologically difficult because we broadly do not like to segregate people by splitting them into groups, but one thing that unites us is the obvious fact that there cannot be one without the other. We currently have a Minister for women and girls; we do not have a Minister for men and boys. During my six years in Parliament, I have looked at these topics. I started with the position that I did not want to see such a Minister, but all the data and metrics coming forward show that boys and men are broadly falling behind. I have come to the conclusion that without a Minister for men and boys, working with a Minister for women and girls, they will continue to do so.

I will canter through some of the evidence. Let us start with health, my background. The most alarming stat is that suicide is the leading cause of death for men under the age of 50—three times more common in men than in women. Between the ages of 15 and 19, for every girl who takes her own life, three and a half boys do likewise. What about cancers? Prostate cancer is the commonest cancer in men, and more than two thirds of liver disease deaths are of men. That is a fourfold increase in death rates from liver disease over the past 40 years.

Some might say that the Government are covering these issues in the men’s health strategy, which is partly true, but let us take something more tricky. I have done a lot of work on steroid abuse and image and performance-enhancing drugs. According to the Priory Group’s research, 10 years ago about 50,000 people were using such drugs. Now, 500,000 to 1 million people are using them to improve their musculature and the way they look. That use is heavily male dominated—so much so that at injection sites where people go illegally to use drugs, about 80% of needle exchange usage is related to steroid abuse. One in 10 gym-goers suffers from bigorexia—wanting to get more muscular. Those are inherently men-related problems.

When I raise that with Government, I am first pointed to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport because it is sport-related, and UK Anti-Doping, but that covers elite sport, and not anything else. The Department of Health and Social Care says that it is a sport problem, an education problem, a Home Office problem or a justice problem. Therein lies the difficulty.

To widen this further, let us move on to education. The Centre for Social Justice’s “Lost Boys” research shows that at GCSE, boys achieve on average half a grade lower than girls in every subject. At A-level, girls outperform boys on average by over a grade and a half across their best three subjects. Female students outnumber male students by three to two for university admissions. House of Commons Library research shows that in spring term 2024, boys were more than 1.5 times more likely to be suspended than girls, and more than twice as likely to be excluded from school.

Let us translate that into employment, which falls under the Department for Work and Pensions and the Department for Business and Trade. Statistics this month from the Office for National Statistics show that there are one million working-age men, aged 16-64, without jobs—the highest since October 2014. The unemployment rate for men is at 5.8%. The last time it was that high was in June 2015. The UK unemployment rate for young males aged between 18 and 24 hit 17% in the three months to December 2025; that surpassed the covid peak that we had, and is the highest rate since 2014. According to the Library, when it comes to young people not in education, employment or training—very topical—historically, young women were more likely to be out of work and education. However, the gap narrowed from 2010 and, since 2016, it has swapped over, with generally more young men being NEET than young women.

What impact does that have on the Home Office and the Ministry of Justice? Some 96% of our prisoners are male; only 4% are female. The CSJ report shows that men make up 90% of hospital admissions for knife assaults. In 2022-23, boys accounted for 87% of homicide victims among people aged 16 to 24, and nine in 10 victims of teenage violence were male. Nine in 10 of our boys in custody said they had been excluded from school. I have not even mentioned the online world, which is covered by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. There are many stats that I could mention, but they all point to the fact that these are cross-departmental issues and, more importantly, cross-societal issues.

I want to touch on the culture for men and boys. Many, many people are starting to raise the alarm about what is happening to young boys and men, from celebrities such as Gareth Southgate and David Gandy to think-tanks like the Centre for Social Justice, Equimundo and the Centre for Policy Research on Men and Boys, and charities including Movember. Why is this happening? My analysis is that, over the past 20 or 30 years, we have been fantastic at championing what women should be, what positive role models should be and what they look like in society. That has been fantastic, and they have had great success from doing that. But, at the same time, we seem to have slightly diminished what it is to be a good man. It used to be a gentleman: someone who was polite, held doors and looked after their other half. Now, men are a little more unsure about that.

If we add in the term “toxic masculinity”, we really have a problem. We do not often hear about toxic femininity. On the one side, we have told women exactly where they should be, what they should do and what they can achieve; on the other, we have taken away the good role model for men, and then potentially demonised them by calling them toxic. No wonder men and boys are struggling to find their way in the world. I often ask the question, “What is a good man in the modern world?” I am yet to find a good answer. Research shows that, when young boys or young men are asked, “Who is your role model?”, they will not give an answer and, if they do, the role models are few and far between. How scary for society that we are not getting the role models for young men to look up to or aspire to be.

What evidence is there to back this up? The CSJ men in culture survey in 2025 was really helpful. It showed that 46%--almost half—agreed with the statement that modern dads are often treated as ineffectual or incompetent in popular culture. Some 76% agreed that today’s teenagers lack proper role models across popular culture. When Members are out and about, they can test that by asking, “Who do men look up to, and why?”, and see if they get an answer. It is actually a little worse than that. The “Lost Boys” report, also by the CSJ, cites Civitas polling that found that 41% of sixth form boys and girls have been taught, in school lessons, that boys are a problem for society. The Government are trying to deal with this, and they are well intended in what they are trying to do.

[Sam Rushworth (Bishop Auckland) (Lab)]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his excellent speech. On boys being seen as a problem in society, does he agree that if we are worried about boys being receptive to messages such as those that come from Andrew Tate, we need to ask what we are putting boys through that could make them fertile soil for such messages?

[Dr Evans]

The hon. Gentleman makes a fantastic point, and I will come on to Andrew Tate. That is my worry, and I have been raising concerns both in this House and outside about the dangers of labelling what young men could be. Only this week, the British Medical Journal published a paper on the topic of the Government’s misogyny plans and lessons, which said that while it is

“well intentioned, the UK government’s strategy to counter misogyny may inadvertently alienate vulnerable young men”.

It went on to say:

“The government’s strategy overlooks the causes that draw young men and boys towards online misogyny. Although the government purportedly aims to tackle the ‘root causes’ of misogynistic abuse, its argument relies on circular logic by claiming that misogyny itself is the cause of abuse.”

Here lies the problem, because I have also been concerned about the assessment of the impact of the likes of Andrew Tate. We all know that he is misogynistic, but what is missed in the media debate is why so many young boys were drawn to him in the first place. He was a world champion kickboxer and he stands up for the masculine traits of being strong, forthright and protective, but he used them to manipulate his position—and young people—to create an empire with a criminal nature behind it.

Unless we get at the root causes of what is going on, I fear that we will make the problem worse rather than better. A good example of that is the #MeToo movement. It was a fantastic movement in 2017, which did so much to uncover the horrendous sexual harassment and sexual assaults that went on. But it has had an impact: surveys in 2019 by the Harvard Business Review found that 19% of men said that they would be

“reluctant to hire attractive women”.

It also found that 21% were

“reluctant to hire women for jobs involving close interpersonal interactions with men”—

for example, those involving travel—and 27% would avoid

“one-on-one meetings with female colleagues”.

That is because they are good men, and they were worried about the impact of how they could have been perceived. That is what happens when we do not have positive role models and a positive place in society for men and boys.

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

Talking about positive role models, in preparation for this debate I looked at the number of people in teacher training who were male. Although the numbers are going up, the proportion of men is going marginally down. I had the advantage—as did my children—of having teachers who were positive role models. What does the hon. Gentleman say about making sure that young people have teachers who are positive role models?

[Dr Evans]

I am really pleased to take that intervention, because the hon. Lady hits on a crucial point. When people are asked about role models, they may often identify their father, teacher, brother or football coach— a male figure in their life who they aspire to. If the number of male role models is falling, that is a concern, and that links to encouraging men and placing them into that profession. That would be one of the merits of having a men and boys Minister: they could look at exactly that issue and make sure that we are not siloed on that basis.

To turn to a more up-to-date view of where society is, an article in Psychology Today in 2023 reported on Pew research that indicated that

“over 60% of young men are currently single”

and that

“sexual intimacy is at a 30-year low across genders.”

The article cited multiple reasons for those findings such as pressure, financial issues and changes in lifestyle choices for men, but it also cited changes in women making more choices about where they want to go. That can leave men feeling lost, isolated and lonely. This is another prime example of men not knowing where they fit in society. As we have touched on, if we get this wrong, the likes of Andrew Tate will fill this space as a way forward, and I am incredibly concerned that that leads young men down a path that we will struggle to get them back from.

Given all the evidence—and there is much, much more that I am sure we will hear about in the debate—and the worsening metrics, I simply ask this: will the Government consider a men and boys Minister? In that context, could the Minister set out why we need a women and girls Minister? To finish where I started, this is about men and women, not men or women.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

It is good to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Twigg, and I am sorry that I did not have the chance to say that in my earlier intervention. I commend the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans) for securing this debate.

When I looked at it, I was amazed at how many different topics might come into scope of this debate, and many of them have been mentioned already. Following all I have heard today, I suspect that we probably do need a Minister for men and boys to make sure there is some focus, because when there is a Minister, people tend to sit up and pay attention to what is going on. I know the Prime Minister said, in response to the focus on “Adolescence”, that he did not want such a Minister, but I think it would not be a bad thing, even if for a trial period of three or five years.

I will briefly summarise. I have already mentioned the data on teacher training, but there are all sorts of other areas that particularly concern men and boys. There is, as far as I can tell, no data on child arrangements orders, referred to by the hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sorcha Eastwood), so we do not know what is happening. Shared parenting has to be a really good thing, with the requisite exclusions where it is not safe. Paternity leave was introduced in 1999 and paternity pay in 2003, but again there are very few public statistics, and the statistics that exist are not comparable, so we cannot see in which direction we are going. We have isolated islands of data that are not particularly helpful.

From 2010 to 2015, I was part of the Administration that introduced shared parental leave and pay under the Children and Families Act 2014. I am glad that the Government reviewed parental leave and pay last year, but as far as I can see, it opened in July and closed in August, when loads of people are on holiday, so I do not know how much of a response there was. Is the Minister able to enlighten us on when the outcome of that consultation might be published? I cannot see any information on that, but she may correct me.

Given my life experience, through the various groups I have worked with over time, I want to put a flag in the ground on another serious problem: men as victims of domestic violence perpetrated by women. It is definitely not cool and definitely difficult for men to report. They do not think they are going to be believed—there is that fear of not being believed.

[Dr Luke Evans]

The hon. Member may be aware of a Netflix series, “The Diplomat”, in which a very strong woman had an altercation with her husband. The comedy of the scene was that she beat him several times with the security guards looking on. That was glossed over and seen as part of being a strong woman, but it is the kind of problem that we have when we talk about men being victims of domestic violence, which is still normalised in modern society these days. Does the hon. Member agree that that is the kind of thing we need to watch out for?

[Tessa Munt]

We need to do more than watch out; that is completely unacceptable. I know so many men who have been the victims of domestic abuse. That is shockingly bad.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Evans]

I appreciate that the Government recognise the issues, but we do have a women and girls Minister. Why do we need a women and girls Minister when we do not have a men and boys Minister?

[Olivia Bailey]

I will come on to discuss that issue in more detail. Some of the issues that the Minister for Women and Equalities would cover include our commitment to tackling violence against women and girls or inequality in the workplace. I will come on to talk in more detail about the things the Government are doing for men and boys.

As I said, we are committed to supporting men and boys in all areas where they face disadvantage, recognising that too many are struggling with the challenges in our society today. That is why the Prime Minister has asked the Deputy Prime Minister to lead work across Government to improve outcomes for men and boys. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has been set up to support Ministers in this work, which includes a specific focus on convening and co-ordinating work across Departments so that we can ensure a joined-up approach that delivers meaningful and measurable change. The Prime Minister has also committed to holding a national summit on men and boys later this year to bring together key sector partners, and we will share more details on that in due course.

The hon. Members for Hinckley and Bosworth and for Wells and Mendip Hills (Tessa Munt) and my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich (Jack Abbott) spoke about the distinct issues that men face in our healthcare system. That is something the Government are acutely aware of, and last year we published England’s first ever men’s health strategy, reflecting many of the concerns rightly raised by speakers today. Drawn up in partnership with men themselves, experts, men’s groups, charities and campaigners, the strategy directly addresses some of the health challenges and disadvantages that men face. It sets out how we are improving men’s access to health services and enabling men to make healthier choices. It also outlines how to tackle the biggest health problems affecting men of all ages, including mental health and suicide, respiratory illness, prostate cancer and heart disease. We are now focused on implementing the commitments set out in the strategy, including how partnerships and stakeholders can support and champion the strategy and its implementation.

On mental health specifically, Members have made thoughtful contributions today, and I thank them for sharing powerful stories. I particularly liked the anecdote told by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) about his mother and “hanging a fiddle on the door”. I thought that was a powerful example of what we are talking about.

Around three in four of the people who died by suicide in 2024 were men, with 25% of incidents being among middle-aged men alone. We are determined to tackle this inequality. Our men’s health strategy includes investment in community-based health and suicide prevention programmes and a new partnership with the Premier League to ensure men know where to go for mental health support. We have also announced the suicide prevention pathfinders programme for middle-aged men. This programme, co-designed with experts and men with lived experience, will tackle the barriers men face in seeking support.

More widely, the Government have already taken significant steps to improve NHS mental health services, including hiring almost 7,000 extra mental health workers since July 2024. And thanks to an increase in NHS talking therapies, more adults with anxiety and depression are getting back into work.

I also want to highlight the work the Government are doing to support boys and young men, in particular. My hon. Friends the Members for Bishop Auckland (Sam Rushworth) and for Ipswich and the hon. Member for Mid Leicestershire (Mr Bedford) raised the challenges they face growing up in today’s society. In particular, comments were made about the importance of school readiness; as I am also the Minister for Early Education, I am determined that we address that issue, as we drive towards record numbers of our children being ready for school.

All children and young people should have every opportunity to succeed across every phase of education. Disadvantaged boys and young men face some of the steepest barriers to success. Over £28 million has been committed to drive standards in reading and writing, particularly for those who need the most support, including boys who underperform in English. That is alongside the National Year of Reading in 2026. The campaign is aimed at everyone, because the decline in reading enjoyment is an issue across all sectors of society. However, there is a focus on boys aged 10 to 16, parents from disadvantaged communities, and other priority groups.

A number of Members spoke about the importance of boys having positive male role models. I agree entirely about the importance of that, but we do need to be careful not to stray into criticising what types of families can bring up brilliant boys. The hon. Member for Strangford rightly said that women can be brilliant role models too. I want to be really clear from the Dispatch Box that single mums can bring up brilliant boys, just as my wife and I can bring up brilliant boys.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Evans]

I think it was the hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sorcha Eastwood) who asked, “Where to start?”. Well, today has been a jolly good place, with cross-party support. She also talked about a journey; a journey starts with the first footstep, and we have certainly had that today.

I thank the hon. Member for Ashfield (Lee Anderson) for pointing out that this is not a hidden problem, and we can no longer pretend that it is. This is something that must be talked about, and my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Leicestershire (Mr Bedford), the Liberal Democrat spokesperson—the hon. Member for Wells and Mendip Hills (Tessa Munt)—and the hon. Member for Ipswich (Jack Abbott) talked specifically about the work, education and data that will drive that. I think that that is imperative. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) also raised the Union aspect, which it is hugely important to consider, because this problem goes across all four countries.

I also thank both chairs of the APPG, the hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Sam Rushworth) and my hon. Friend the Member for East Grinstead and Uckfield (Mims Davies), for what they do and for driving this topic forward not just in this Chamber, but outside it.

To conclude, if men truly are from Mars, and women truly are from Venus, I believe that this House and this Government have a duty to support, translate and govern the whole solar system—not just one planet.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the potential merits of appointing a Minister for Men and Boys.

Oral Answers to Questions

Luke Evans Excerpts

Monday 16th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Morgan]

Is that all that the right hon. Lady can go on? After 14 years, the Conservatives broke the education system. As I said, guidance is already in place for schools, and the majority of schools already have a ban on mobile phone use.

[Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)]

4. What steps she is taking to help improve the school estate.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Stephen Morgan)]

This Government are committed to sustained investment to improve the school estate, in order to give children the best start in life. We will increase annual capital investment for maintenance in real terms, rising from £2.1 billion this financial year to around £2.3 billion in 2029-30—over £400 million more than in 2024-25. That is on top of around £2.4 billion per year over the next four years to 2029-30 to continue the school rebuilding programme in over 500 schools. We will go further by expanding the programme, providing long-term certainty through to 2034-35, and we will set out details in the forthcoming 10-year infrastructure strategy.

[Dr Evans]

I am grateful to the Minister for his answer. I draw his attention to the process for getting some of that funding. Battling Brook is a small primary school in the heart of Hinckley. It is well loved, but it has had problems with two of its classrooms having damp and falling into disrepair, so the school cannot use them. It applied to the condition improvement fund but was declined. The school feels that the goalposts have been shifted; there was a six-month delay in the condition data collection report, so it was marked down, and this all culminated in Battling Brook not getting the funding it needs. Will the Minister look at this case and have a meeting with me, so that I can go back to Battling Brook and make sure it gets the funding it needs to reopen its classrooms in September for the primary school pupils of Hinckley?

[Stephen Morgan]

The hon. Member has not been shy in lobbying me on these issues, but I would be very happy to meet him again. He will know that the Department provides advice and support on a case-by-case basis, and I am happy to discuss these issues with him further.

Oral Answers to Questions

Luke Evans Excerpts

Monday 4th November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Morgan]

We are helping members of the workforce to develop the skills and confidence that will enable them to work effectively with children with SEND, and reviewing early years funding arrangements to ensure that they meet the needs of those children. I should be happy to meet my hon. Friend or visit her constituency to understand the issues that her local providers are facing.

[Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)]

Martin Lewis has long campaigned for changes in childcare, in particular because the way in which it is set up can damage single parents. There is an obvious cliff edge. The last Government proposed a consultation on thresholds for households being taken as one, but this Government seem to have scrapped that in the Budget. Will Ministers be speaking to the Treasury to decide how they will overcome this cliff edge that affects so many single parents?

[Stephen Morgan]

I thank the hon. Member for his question. We have a child-centred Government, and early years is a priority for the Secretary of State. We will focus on reforming the childcare system to ensure that it is fit for purpose for the future and of high quality for all young people. We are taking the sector’s concerns seriously, and we want to ensure there is a sustainable system going forward.

Universities: Freedom of Speech

Luke Evans Excerpts

Thursday 10th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Catherine McKinnell]

My hon. Friend makes the point well. The Department is absolutely committed to upholding the IHRA definition as well as challenging and educating on issues that a range of hon. Members have raised today. We need to have a robust education system that informs and creates healthy debate on these issues, but it must also be lawful and protect the freedom of speech of those expressing lawful views.

[Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)]

Does the Minister believe that cancel culture and no-platforming are a problem? Does she believe they are getting worse? She has mentioned that this is important; why, then, will she not set out a concrete timetable for the introduction of this new legislation?

[Catherine McKinnell]

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman’s desire to see these changes. However, we want to take the time to get this right. We are absolutely committed to free speech—I have said that a number of times—and we want to take time to ensure that we protect it in the best way possible.

Oral Answers to Questions

Luke Evans Excerpts

Monday 28th November 2022 Commons Chamber

[Danny Kruger (Devizes) (Con)]

5. What steps her Department is taking to increase the number of school places for pupils with (a) special educational needs and (b) disabilities.

[Dr Luke Evans (Bosworth) (Con)]

7. What steps her Department is taking to increase the number of school places for pupils with (a) special educational needs and (b) disabilities.

[Tom Hunt (Ipswich) (Con)]

21. What steps her Department is taking to increase the number of school places for pupils with (a) special educational needs and (b) disabilities.

--- Later in debate ---

[Claire Coutinho]

My hon. Friend is a doughty campaigner for Wiltshire and I applaud the council on the work it is doing. Ofsted is revising its framework on this area, which was set out in the Green Paper earlier this year. My hon. Friend might be interested to know that we are also looking at better local and national dashboards to improve local accountability.

[Dr Evans]

I thank the Minister, who has already said that the consultation results will come out in January, but day in, day out in Leicestershire we hear cases involving parents who have had to struggle and fight to get SEND support, which is one of the biggest problems they face. Will that be put at the heart of the review? Secondly, the Minister talked about the £2.6 billion. How can the likes of Leicestershire get hold of some of that cash to improve one of the biggest areas of struggle in SEND provision?

[Claire Coutinho]

My hon. Friend is right that many parents find the system adversarial. That is one of the key things we are seeking to address by making what parents can expect much clearer and by simplifying and digitising their EHCP—education, health and care plan—application process, among our other measures. Meanwhile, Leicestershire will continue to be supported through its delivering better value programme, among other things.

Making Britain the Best Place to Grow Up and Grow Old

Luke Evans Excerpts

Monday 16th May 2022 Commons Chamber

[Carol Monaghan]

Madam Deputy Speaker, I have not. I was not making a point of order; I was referring to something that was said in a debate and has been said in the press.

The chef, Gareth Mason, said:

“I’ve come to the conclusion it’s a load of rubbish. These meals I’ve done, as soon as you put any protein or dairy into them, it’s not feasible to do it for 30p. If you eat beans on toast for every meal, it might work, but even if you did cheese on toast, the cost of cheese would be more than 30p on its own”,

and that is before considering the cooking cost of the food.

[Dr Luke Evans (Bosworth) (Con)]

My hon. Friend the Member for Ashfield (Lee Anderson) was very clear that he offered anyone on the Opposition Benches to go and join him down in Ashfield. Given the problems the hon. Member has outlined, is she planning on going down to see what happens in Ashfield and how that food bank functions?

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Luke Evans (Bosworth) (Con)]

May I take this opportunity to say a great deal of thanks from my constituency to the Queen for her service over almost 70 years, as I may not get that chance going forward?

The subject of today’s session is making Britain the best place to grow up and grow old. Two and a half years into my service as the MP for my constituency, I thought that it would be worth touching on a few things that are trying to move that plan forward.

We have had millions of pounds for Hinckley Academy to make sure that we have education that supports our local children. We have had £19.9 million for Twycross zoo to create a conservation and education centre to breed the conservationists of the future. We have had £28 million for internet for Leicestershire, which means that 330 houses in Sketchley Brook in Burbage now have better, faster internet access. We have had £1.8 million to improve Hinckley high street and ensure that people go there and want to enjoy it, whether they are a child or an OAP. We are working on improving the A5, which is vital infrastructure for our constituency for people to get to their jobs: £20 million has been invested and we moved through decision point 1 in March. I am keen to see that go forward.

Most importantly, £7 million has been put towards Hinckley hospital, with another community diagnostic centre coming and a plan that is ready to go. I am dead keen to make sure that there is no red tape in its way, because it puts Hinckley on the map and provides the service that we need for our community of children, adults and OAPs. That is what it is all about.

In the three minutes that I have left, I want to focus on two subjects: planning and the Online Safety Bill. I have heard the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities use the acronym BIDEN for the five crucial points of planning: beauty, infrastructure, democracy, environment and neighbourhoods. I put it to him that he has missed a trick there, because “INBED with Gove” would be a far better selling point. However, the principles are right: we need the right homes, in the right place, with the right infrastructure that is right for our environment. That is fundamental to our planning system, but the current system does not deliver it. My constituency typifies that, because under the Lib Dem borough council we do not have an up-to-date local plan, which means that every single day we are open to speculative development without that infrastructure, without those amenities and without that support.

I am pleased that the Queen’s Speech is bringing forward planning change. That should concentrate on strengthening neighbourhood plans and localism in action, especially for those without an up-to-date local plan. The infrastructure levy is important for getting funding up front for the amenities that we need: the roads, the GP surgeries, and the schools. All those things need to be rectified, so I am glad that change is being introduced. Of course, there is also the question of building out. Developers getting the land is one thing, but using it is another. We need houses for young people and their families to aspire to, but we also need houses for our pensioners to retire or downsize to, and we need to provide support for them.

I come at the Online Safety Bill through my work on body image. There are two fundamental things that I would like to see in the Bill. First, there needs to be a legally named person for the algorithm. We have safeguarding leads in schools, we have Caldicott guardians in health and we have GDPR controllers. On our social media and on the internet, the algorithm is fundamental, so naming someone who is accountable would mean that anyone in this House or in this country could hold the big companies to account. That is imperative in lifting the bonnet to see what is underneath and what is driving the content that all of us—children or adults—are served. Secondly, we should allow people to choose to be served verified authentic images. The technology exists. We are allowing people to choose anonymity, so why do we not do it with authenticated images? Those two little changes would really make sure that we grow up and grow old in the best of Britain.

Special Educational Needs and Disabilities Review

Luke Evans Excerpts

Tuesday 29th March 2022 Commons Chamber

[Nadhim Zahawi]

I respectfully remind the hon. Lady that, in my opening remarks, I mentioned that, in early years, up to 5,000 new SENCOs will go into the school system to be able to do that work, and there is the support that we are putting in, including the £7 billion that is going into the school system, the £5 billion for recovery and the £2.6 billion in certain places. I also remind the House that change and change management are difficult. One area that I looked at, where we perhaps fell over in implementing the very good reforms that were introduced with the EHCPs, is how we deliver that change. I have £70 million going into change management to ensure that we have the resources in place, and I am confident that we can do this well.

[Dr Luke Evans (Bosworth) (Con)]

I welcome the statement, and I have two points to make. First, the fight—time and again, parents talk about the fight that they have had to have with the system. Will the Secretary of State explain how these changes will bring transparency? Secondly, he mentioned that we cannot wait for the Green Paper process to finish, and I have read that he would like to build a further tranche of new special and alternative provision free schools. When will that take place and when can Leicestershire have its fair share?

[Nadhim Zahawi]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The changes that I spoke about include the single national integrated SEND and AP system; excellent provision from early years to adulthood; building an inclusive system; a single integrated vision for AP; setting out clear roles and responsibilities; and accountability, because the fight begins when parents are confused, when they do not know who is accountable or where to go, and they feel alone. That is not the way it will be, because they will be able to see—we will co-create this with the sector—what they should be entitled to anywhere in the country. I will wipe out the postcode lottery, which is part of the issue relating to the fight, and set out plans to support effective implementation. One of the lessons that I learned in vaccine deployment is that however ambitious we are, if we do not have the team and have not thought through how we are going to succeed on the ground operationally, we will fall over, and I promise to think that through.

Education: Return in January

Luke Evans Excerpts

Wednesday 5th January 2022 Commons Chamber

[Nadhim Zahawi]

I mentioned earlier the funding settlement in the SR, and when I talk to school leaders, they say that they think that has been a good outcome for us in education. Of course, I also spoke about the £5 billion of catch-up funding. We are sometimes in danger of getting into an arms race in respect of how much we can announce, but my focus is on output: how many children have we managed to get to catch up, whether through the tuition partners scheme or any of the other schemes I have mentioned?

[Dr Luke Evans (Bosworth) (Con)]

I am grateful for the Secretary of State’s answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (Mark Pawsey) about the £4.9 billion for catch-up. Going forward, there is an opportunity to make sure that we get our pupils in front of teachers, and one way to do that is to extend the school day. The idea was raised with the Secretary of State’s predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for South Staffordshire (Gavin Williamson), and the Chair of the Education Committee, my right hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Robert Halfon), is a big advocate of it. Is my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State considering taking the idea forward as a long-term plan to make sure that pupils really are educated to the best of their ability?

[Nadhim Zahawi]

That is what we are doing as part of catch-up for 16 to 19-year-olds, who have the least time left in education and therefore in effect face the greatest challenge because of covid. I have also said at the Dispatch Box previously that because of our research capability in the Department we now know that the average school day is 6.5 hours; I would like those whose days are below average to move towards that average. I will always look at what the high-performing schools and multi-academy trusts do to deliver additional work, and not just academic work. The Minister for School Standards is looking at all the other things that deliver a rounded, healthy individual who becomes a brilliantly capable adult.

Oral Answers to Questions

Luke Evans Excerpts

Monday 1st November 2021 Commons Chamber

[Nadhim Zahawi]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend—I think he is—for his question, although I completely disagree with him. Nevertheless, it is important to remember that the arts play an incredible role in enriching minds, especially young minds, and in inward investment to the United Kingdom and exports from the UK. We continue to value high-quality provision in a range of subjects critical to our workforce, including the arts. That is why I mentioned the work of the Office for Students in reinvesting an additional £10 million in our world-leading specialist providers, many of which specialise in arts provision.

[Dr Luke Evans (Bosworth) (Con)]

2. What steps he is taking to support schools with the cost of managing covid-19.

[The Secretary of State for Education (Nadhim Zahawi)]

Teachers and school leaders have made a huge contribution to the nation’s efforts, and we are grateful for their hard work. Schools continue to receive core funding throughout the pandemic, regardless of any periods of reduced attendance. The 2021 spending review has confirmed significant funding increases, with a cash increase for schools averaging £1,500 per pupil by 2024-25.

[Dr Evans]

I welcome the Secretary of State’s answer. I have met heads at Bosworth Academy in Desford and Hastings High School in Burbage, who welcome the funding they have had throughout covid but are concerned about what could happen to staffing budgets in particular because of absenteeism through covid. Does the Secretary of State have a plan to deal with that, and will he meet me to hear their concerns so that we can work out a solution?

[Nadhim Zahawi]

Of course I will meet my hon. Friend. We recognise that some schools are concerned about pressures and have made available a range of school resources and management tools to help them get best value from their resources. I just remind the House that the increase of £1,500 per pupil by 2024-25 is compared with 2019-20.