Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Olivia Bailey Excerpts

Monday 9th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

I beg to move, That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 2.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

With this it will be convenient to discuss:

Lords amendment 5, and Government motion to disagree.

Lords amendment 16, and Government motion to disagree.

Lords amendment 17, and Government motion to disagree.

Lords amendment 19, and Government motion to disagree.

Lords amendment 21, and Government motion to disagree.

Lords amendments 37 and 38, Government motions to disagree, amendments (a) to (c) to Lords amendment 38, and Government amendments (a) to (d) in lieu of Lords amendments 37 and 38.

Lords amendment 41, and Government motion to disagree.

Lords amendment 42, and Government motion to disagree.

Lords amendment 44, and Government motion to disagree.

Lords amendment 102, and Government motion to disagree.

Lords amendment 105, and Government motion to disagree.

Lords amendment 106, Government motion to disagree, and amendment (a).

Lords amendments 1, 3, 4, 6 to 15, 18, 20, 22 to 36, 39, 40, 43, 45 to 101, 103, 104

and 107 to 121.

[Olivia Bailey]

Children’s voices are heard rarely in this place and are too often ignored in our society, so I say at the outset that it is truly a special privilege to play my part in the passage of this landmark legislation. This Bill is about creating the conditions in which every child can achieve and thrive, to ensure safer and more secure childhoods, to tackle the scrouge of child poverty and to deliver high and rising school standards. Today I ask the House to renew its commitment to that ambition for our children and our country. I extend my thanks to my colleague and friend, Baroness Smith of Malvern, the Minister for Skills, for her skilful stewardship of the Bill. I ask hon. Members to back the Government amendments made in the other place that increase the ambition of the legislation.

In part 1 of the Bill, we have introduced a new duty on local housing authorities to, with consent, notify educational institutions, GP practices and health visiting services when a child is placed in temporary accommodation. We have also strengthened the Government’s work to put the voices of children at the heart of decisions about their futures, with amendments on family group decision making and the kinship local offer.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

On that point, will the Minister give way?

[Olivia Bailey]

Sorry, but I have to make progress as I have so much to get through.

Turning to part 2 of the Bill and schools, we are taking forward our historic strategy to lift children out of poverty. As my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan) set out last year, from September all children in households receiving universal credit will be eligible for free school meals. That will put £500 back in families’ pockets, support 500,000 more children with a nutritious meal and lift 100,000 children out of poverty. That is the difference that this Labour Government are making for children and families. We are supporting this by upgrading the eligibility checking system, making it much easier for local authorities, schools and parents to confirm free school meal eligibility.

Finally, the Government are also enabling the introduction of academy trust inspection and giving powers to the Secretary of State where academy trusts are not meeting acceptable standards.

I will now turn to the 13 non-Government amendments made in the other place, first the amendments relating to child protection. On Lords amendment 2, statutory guidance is already clear that a multi-agency conference should take place to review whether the child protection plan should be discharged. On Lords amendment 5, effective multi-agency child protection practices that prevent tragedies and save lives needs to happen now—further delay is unacceptable. In addition, evaluation is already under way, and regulations to give multi-agency child protection teams their functions will be subject consultation and parliamentary scrutiny.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

There is much positivity in what the Government are bringing forward. Back in Northern Ireland, Minister Paul Givan has brought forward a pilot scheme to take smartphones out of the classroom while children are in school. Has the Minister considered that positive strategy? If it is a positive in Northern Ireland, I think it would be a positive here as well.

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that important intervention; I will turn to that matter in due course.

The Government cannot support Lords amendment 44 on principle. Extending the consent requirement would risk discouraging families from seeking or continuing to receive help or support. The amendment suggests that a child’s or a family’s circumstances can never change.

[Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)]

On that point, will the Minister give way?

[Olivia Bailey]

I am sorry but I am going to make some progress.

I will now turn to the amendments relating to looked-after children and deprivation of liberty. Lords amendment 16 concerns a proposed review of the level of funding for the adoption and special guardianship support fund. We all know the importance of effective support for the success of adoptive families. That is why the Under-Secretary of State for Education, my hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister), announced £55 million for the fund in 2026-27 and confirmed that the fund will continue in 2027-28. He also announced a 12-week consultation on adoption support, including the ASGSF. I am sure that hon. Members will agree that it is important that we do not undermine the integrity of the consultation by undertaking a separate review.

Lords amendment 17 intends to strengthen relationships between looked-after children and their siblings. In practice, it would require local authorities to record in the care plan any contact arrangements made between looked-after children and any sibling they are not living with.

I am proud that this Government have set out the biggest reforms to the children’s social care system in a generation. In particular, we are implementing changes to expand fostering, creating 10,000 additional places for children, and resetting the system to back kinship care, so that more children can grow up safely with people who already know and love them. These changes will allow many more children who grow up in care to spend time with their brothers or sisters.

[Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)]

I congratulate the Government on making kinship care central to their policies. Many children in care experience significant disruption in their lives, through multiple home moves and school changes, and relationships with their brothers and sisters are so central to a child’s sense of identity, belonging and emotional security. Will the Minister look again at how regulations and guidance could better ensure that those relationships are protected?

[Olivia Bailey]

I agree with my hon. Friend about the importance of sibling relationships. Lords amendment 17 would do little to advance that cause, but the reforms that we are driving forward on children’s social care will.

Lords amendment 19 seeks to include integrated care boards in regional co-operation arrangements. The Government agree that is important to include health partners in regional arrangements to improve looked-after children’s outcomes, but there are already legal requirements on local authorities to do this. These duties will continue to apply to local authorities that form regional care co-operatives, and the amendment is therefore unnecessary.

Lords amendment 21 concerns joint funding arrangements for children deprived of their liberty. Mechanisms for pooled funding already exist and work well in some areas, and legislating now would be premature ahead of pilots that will test effective models.

Lords amendments 41 and 42 seek a monetary cap rather than a numeric limit on branded school uniform. I welcome their lordships’ support of the Government’s aim to tackle the cost of uniform for parents. Our manifesto was clear that we will limit of branded items of uniform required, so uniforms make children look smarter but do not make families poorer. However, these amendments would undermine our shared aims. A cost cap would risk creating perverse incentives for schools by creating a financial target; many schools could require more branded items, reducing savings for parents.

A cost cap would require Government to regulate for wider, unworkable factors, including how many spares parents might buy, cost variations for clothing sizes and even promotional pricing. It would also impose new bureaucracy on schools to carry out regular retail price monitoring, often across multiple suppliers. We recognise concerns about high-cost individual items, which is why we will strengthen existing cost guidance to be clear that high-cost compulsory branded uniform items should be avoided.

Lords amendment 102 seeks to limit the circumstances in which the adjudicator can specify a lower published admissions number following an upheld objection. Every parent should be able to send their child to a good local school, and we want a choice of good schools for all families. That is why, when we bring forward the updated statutory school admissions code, it will make securing a high-quality education and high levels of parental choice central factors in any decision on PAN. However, at a time of declining pupil numbers, schools acting unilaterally in isolation can put that parental choice at risk. That is exactly why clause 56, unamended, is essential to help to ensure that all schools and local authorities work together to ensure that place-planning delivers a choice of high-quality schools for all families.

[Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)]

I completely agree with the Minister’s position; parents should have the choice to send their child to whichever school they believe is best for them. In relation to admissions, one of my first cases after becoming an MP was an automatic off-rolling of a child after she had been absent for 20 days, despite the absence having been communicated to the school and extended due to a bereavement. She was off-rolled with no process and no review, and she was out of school for nine months. Will the Minister consider reviewing this punitive policy to ensure that there is a formal review before a child is removed from their preferred school?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

Order. The Minister is being very generous with her time. However, she will be aware that many Members wish to speak in this debate. As it stands, that will be very difficult, given the time constraints.

[Olivia Bailey]

If the hon. Gentleman writes to me about that case, I am happy to look into it for him. Off-rolling absolutely should not be happening.

Let me turn to the crucial issue of allergies. Lords amendment 105 seeks to introduce mandatory allergy safety provisions for all schools. The Government agree with Members across the House who have been campaigning for improved allergy safety in schools, including my hon. Friend the Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore) and the hon. Member for Rutland and Stamford (Alicia Kearns). Last week, we published draft statutory guidance, which will be in force in September. It sets out clearly that schools should have a dedicated allergy safety policy and stock spare adrenalin devices, as well as whole-staff allergy awareness training.

At the launch, I had the privilege of joining Helen and Peter Blythe, and their wonderful daughter Etta. Their campaigning in memory of their son, Benedict, has been both brave and instrumental. We recognise their argument about allergy safety requiring the strongest protections. That is why I am pleased to confirm—with Helen in the Gallery today—that we will put Benedict’s law on the statute book, with our own amendment to require schools to have and publish an allergy safety policy, to have regard to statutory guidance and to give powers to the Secretary of State to make regulations relating to allergy safety. This will protect children with allergies in schools and ensure that our guidance can evolve as clinical advice changes. I am sure the whole House will join me in thanking Helen once again for her bravery and brilliant campaigning.

[Alicia Kearns (Rutland and Stamford) (Con)]

I thank the Minister for recognising that we need to legislate to protect children with allergies in schools. Can she reassure us that the Benedict Blythe Foundation, Helen and the MPs who have campaigned for this will see the amendment at the very earliest opportunity before it goes to the Lords, so we can ensure that Benedict’s law is delivered in full?

[Olivia Bailey]

Absolutely—I can give that assurance. I am afraid that I cannot take any further interventions, because I must get through the last section of my speech.

Let me turn to Lords amendments 37, 38 and 106, on social media, VPNs and phones in schools. I acknowledge the strength of feeling on these issues in both this House and the other place. The Online Safety Act 2023 brought in strong protections, but this Government have always been clear that we will build on its foundations. We know that parents across the country worry about what social media is doing to their children’s sleep, concentration and mental health. Many feel that they are fighting a losing battle against platforms designed to keep children scrolling.

Many parents and campaign groups have called for an outright ban on social media for under-16s. Others, including children’s charities, have warned that a blanket ban could drive children towards less regulated corners of the internet or leave teenagers unprepared when they do come online. That is why last week the Government launched a consultation to seek views to help to shape our next steps and ensure that children can grow up with a safer, healthier and more enriching relationship with the online world. The consultation will be open until 26 May, and we will respond in the summer.

The consultation already addresses the areas covered by the Lords amendments. Crucially, the consultation goes beyond the Lords amendments and seeks a view on a range of other issues, including children’s use of AI chatbot services, mandatory overnight curfews, whether platforms should be required to switch off addictive features, and whether the digital age of consent in the UK general data protection regulation should be raised from 13.

We are also ensuring that we can act swiftly and decisively on the outcomes of the consultation. That is why we are proposing an amendment in lieu to allow us to act via regulation-making powers. These powers will allow the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology to restrict or ban children of certain ages from accessing social media services and chatbots, limit access to specific features that are harmful or addictive on these services, age-restrict or limit children’s VPN use, and change the age of digital consent in the UK GDPR if the outcomes of the consultation show that that is necessary. The specific measures will be shaped by what parents, children and experts tell us, and any regulations brought forward will require a vote in both Houses of Parliament, ensuring proper scrutiny.

[Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)]

Will the Minister give way?

[Olivia Bailey]

I cannot; I must make progress—I am so sorry.

We understand that we need to act swiftly, and rest assured that through these powers we will be able to do so. Let me be extremely clear that it is not a question of if we act, but how.

Finally, let me briefly turn to Lords amendment 106. We have always been clear that mobile phones have no place in schools, but because previous guidance was not sufficiently clear, we have published strengthened guidance so there can be no doubt that, from bell to bell, schools should be mobile phone free. We are also acting to ensure that bans are properly enforced. Our network of attendance and behaviour hubs will provide targeted support to schools that are struggling. From April, Ofsted will inspect schools’ mobile phones policies and enforcement. Our consultation is seeking views on whether we need to go further to support schools—for example, whether the guidance should be placed on a statutory footing.

Hon. Members have the chance tonight to vote to keep children safe online and offline, to tackle child poverty by putting money back into parents’ pockets, and to put in place a schools system that enables every child across all our schools to achieve and thrive. I urge the House to support this vision for our children and our country’s future, and to back the Government’s amendments in lieu. I look forward to the remainder of the debate.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

--- Later in debate ---

[Laura Trott]

I profoundly disagree with the hon. Gentleman. At a time of shrinking school places, it is important that it is the good school places that survive, and parents should make that choice, not bureaucrats.

The Government’s inability simply to admit that they got it wrong in the Bill, and that there is a better way of achieving the outcome they want, is ever present. Lords amendment 41, which would impose a cost cap on school uniform, is palpably better than having a cap on the number of items. It is the height of insanity to insist that it should be illegal for a school to use the football kit it received for free because that would be outside of the item limit. If anyone is thinking that this cannot actually be Government policy, I suggest that they read the guidance that sits alongside the legislation. It literally says that

“All loaned or gifted branded items will be captured within the limit if they are required to be worn”,

meaning that they come under the cap. That makes absolutely no sense.

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank the right hon. Lady for raising that specific point, but it is clear in the guidance that an item can be loaned as long as it is not compulsory. That is a perfectly reasonable situation that enables school sports teams to loan uniform items.

[Laura Trott]

The whole point is whether it is compulsory or not—that is the whole point of uniform, and I was reading directly from the guidance. It makes absolutely no sense; how is a child wearing something that they have been given for free going to increase costs for parents? If the “not invented here” syndrome were not running so rampant in the Department for Education, the change made by Lords amendment 41 would already have been made.

The same is true of Lords amendment 44. We all know the horrific case of Sara Sharif, which was used as a rationale for bringing forward many of the positive child protection measures in the Bill. The serious case review published at the end of last year set out multiple failings that led to Sara falling out of the system. That review states that, while well intentioned, this legislation would not have helped Sara, so we have brought forward amendment 44 to fix that. It ensures that consent would need to be sought from the local authority to homeschool any child who has ever had a child protection plan. That would mean that the Bill would have helped Sara, which is the Government’s stated aim, but guess what, Madam Deputy Speaker? The Government are now opposing that amendment. We are diligently doing the work an Opposition should do to improve the legislation, but it is being shrugged off by the Government—not on its merits, but because they do not want to accept anything from this side of the House. It is not good enough.

--- Later in debate ---

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. I call the Minister to wind up.

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank Members from across the House for their varied and valuable contributions. We have heard a number of powerful speeches that made really important points. I am very sorry that I do not have enough time to respond in detail, but I will endeavour to write to Members who asked specific questions.

This is a Bill with opportunity at its heart—opportunity for every child, no matter the circumstances they are born into. It will make children safer online and offline, with our ambitious, swift action on social media and phones; it will help to tackle the cost of living crisis with our action on free school meals and the cost of uniforms; and it will drive up standards in our schools and improve outcomes for children in care.

Tonight, the House has the opportunity to support free school meals for half a million more children, swift action to protect our children online, and the most significant safeguarding measures in a generation. This is a landmark Bill, but it is also a Labour Bill—because it is ambitious for every single child in this country. I urge the House to support Labour’s vision for our children and for our country’s future.

Lords amendment 3 disagreed to.

Lords amendment 5 disagreed to.

World Book Day

Olivia Bailey Excerpts

Thursday 5th March 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

I am not sure it is possible to follow that, although I congratulate the hon. Member for Windsor (Jack Rankin) on his efforts and his speech entirely in rhyme. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship today, Mrs Hobhouse.

I thank all hon. Members for attending and contributing to this debate. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), on securing it and on the valuable work that she is doing as Chair of the Education Committee. I look forward to hearing the outcomes of her inquiry into reading for pleasure.

I really love World Book Day, and I have had a wonderful World Book Day today; I went on a visit to talk about school food, and the entire school was dressed up, including the executive headteacher, who was dressed as a very impressive Gandalf, complete with a full beard. It was quite fun to have a full meeting with her to iscuss school food, and I congratulate her on her efforts and on her lovely school. I also have very fond memories of World Book Day with my children—who I packed off this morning in their outfits—especially from when they were younger. One year, my son chose to dress up as the green frog from “Room on the Broom”, which I think is a very good choice of outfit.

I was pleased to hear all Members’ reflections today. My hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood was right to thank all those involved in running World Book Day and, of course, all parents scrabbling around to create outfits from brooms and the like. I look forward to hearing the outcomes of her inquiry. I also agree with her on the importance of children being able to find themselves in books—a theme that we have heard throughout the afternoon.

The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) gave a characteristically engaging speech, and I really enjoyed hearing about the joy that his five grandchildren find in reading—

[Jim Shannon]

Six.

[Olivia Bailey]

Six! I misheard the hon. Member; I do apologise. And I am sure that they really enjoy listening to him read to them.

My hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West (Richard Quigley) made a wonderful speech celebrating the literary past and present of the Isle of Wight, and was powerful in his clear determination to secure strong outcomes for his constituents.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) painted a wonderful picture of his Cyclops outfit—I will be trying to google it—and made a powerful case for inclusive reading.

For my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow West (Patricia Ferguson), I would like to congratulate Martha on winning her competition, and all the entrants in my hon. Friend’s constituency.

My hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) told an amazing story about the book that she wrote to persuade Amazon to put Dunstable on the books. I congratulate her on that —what fantastic efforts!

The hon. Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) rightly highlighted the importance that this Government place on breaking down barriers to opportunity, and I agree with her that reading for pleasure is a central part of that—my speech will come on to that. She asked me about the role of family hubs and the importance of encouraging children to read at the earliest ages. I reassure her on that point: it is central to what we are trying to do with our best start in life strategy.

The hon. Lady—and the hon. Member for Windsor—also talked about screen time, which is very important to this Government. I am pleased that we are co-creating with parents the first ever guidance on screen time for the under-fives. We have published research that shows that too much screen time can cause challenges for language development. The research also says that the best thing people can do is pick up a book with their child. We are also publishing screen-time guidance for older children.

We have also published tougher guidance on phones in schools to be clear that, from bell to bell, there should be absolutely no phones in schools. We are working with attendance and behaviour hubs to make sure that schools are supported to deliver that, and Ofsted will also be inspecting on it. We do not want children in schools being distracted by buzzing phones in their pockets, and we are clear about that. On the wider question of the harms of the online world, I encourage all Members to contribute to our extensive consultation on social media and the online world, which is live now.

As Members have said today, World Book Day is a fantastic worldwide celebration of books and reading, marked in more than 100 countries around the world. I thank everyone for their enormous contribution. We know that reading for pleasure is hugely important and brings a wide range of benefits from increased wellbeing, confidence and empathy to better vocabulary and aptitude for learning, yet just one in three children says that they enjoy reading, which is an all-time low. That is why this Government have launched the National Year of Reading, a UK-wide campaign to tackle the steep decline in reading enjoyment among children, young people and adults.

The National Year of Reading campaign, “Go All In”, emphasises that reading is a great way to explore and deepen our interests and passions. Put simply, if you are into it, read into it. That might be a book about a fairytale world, a fascinating period of history or, for those of us who are passionate about parliamentary procedure—perhaps the hon. Member for Strangford were he still in his place—I suggest “Erskine May”.

Regardless of what we choose to read, the year is packed full of exciting events, webinars, resources and activities happening in communities, libraries, schools and early years settings up and down the country. I encourage all Members to get involved. World Book Day sits right at the heart of the National Year of Reading, offering children a selection of books to choose from for free with their £1 book token, and a range of activities and resources for schools to help generate a national buzz around reading.

As has been noted, libraries are at the heart of the National Year of Reading campaign. I am delighted that this Government have committed more than £10 million to ensure that every primary school in England will have a library by the end of this Parliament and, for secondary schools, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced £5 million to purchase books and reading materials.

Alongside school libraries, public libraries have a strong offer to support children’s development as readers beyond school—for example, through the summer reading challenge—and are part of the vital social and cultural infrastructure of the country. This week, to support the National Year of Reading, the Government announced a funding boost to support local library services in areas with the greatest need to go further in engaging communities to boost library use. Further to that support, the Government will build on excellence by awarding a £1,000 cash prize to each of the five English regional winners of the library of the year award to continue local reading projects.

Reading is not just important for pleasure; it also holds the key to the rest of the curriculum. This financial year, therefore, we have committed £28 million to drive high and rising standards in reading and writing. That funding is delivering a range of support for schools, including new training for primary schools, to help children progress from the early stages of phonics to reading fluently by the time they leave primary school.

For secondary schools, we have launched a new continuing professional development programme, Unlocking Reading, to improve support for struggling readers in key stage 3. Our aim is that by the end of this academic year, 75% of secondary schools will have access to that training. Also, our RISE, or regional improvement for standards and excellence, English hubs are dedicated to improving the teaching of reading. Since their launch, they have provided targeted support to more than 3,000 schools across England.

In closing, I recognise the important contributions of charities and organisations to promote the importance of reading for pleasure, including World Book Day, the National Literacy Trust, the Reading Agency, the Book Trust and many more. Last year, I had the absolute privilege of meeting Peter Rabbit and the Queen at the Book Trust’s centenary celebration. It was one of my favourite days in the job so far. Reading books like “Peter Rabbit” shaped my childhood and I want that same joy for every child.

Ensuring that our young people in every corner of our country learn to enjoy reading is one of this Labour Government’s key priorities. In this National Year of Reading, we are laying strong foundations for learning, wellbeing and success throughout life. By working in partnership with schools, families, libraries and communities, we can create a lasting legacy where reading for pleasure is valued as an integral part of our childhoods.

Oral Answers to Questions

Olivia Bailey Excerpts

Monday 2nd March 2026 Commons Chamber

[John Whitby (Derbyshire Dales) (Lab)]

4. What steps she is taking to help prevent the use of phones by children in schools.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

Mobile phones have no place in our schools. We have published strengthened guidance that is clear that all schools should be mobile phone-free environments by default for the entire school day. Ofsted will be checking this at every inspection.

[John Whitby]

What assessment has been made of the magnetic lockable pouches that are being used in some schools as a way of preventing any smartphone access during the entire school day, including lunch time and breaks? Could a national roll-out of those be considered?

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank my hon. Friend for his excellent support for the schools in his constituency. Lockable pouches are being used successfully by many schools and are listed in the Department’s examples of best practice approaches. Heads can rightly choose how they implement the mobile phone ban in their school to reflect what works best in context.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

Last week, I spent time with teachers and students from Chichester high school who have implemented the use of lockable magnetic pouches. Students told me that this had improved their focus in lessons and, interestingly, that the number of bathroom breaks had halved. Their use has reduced the pull of the addictive features on phones, and teachers report that children are just being children at break times rather than being glued to their phones. I am glad that the Minister shares my ambition to see every school become phone free, but what support are the Government going to provide for schools that have really tight budget restrictions to enable them to achieve this?

[Olivia Bailey]

I congratulate the pupils and staff at Chichester high school on their great work in this space. It is fantastic to hear that the policy they are implementing is making a difference for the children. Phones should not be in schools, and we are going to be working with schools through our attendance and behaviour hubs, along with our toughened guidance, to make sure we support them to implement this policy properly.

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

I am pleased that the Government are looking at ways to protect our children and young people when it comes to the use of screens. It is vital that teachers, parents and young people have strong guidance in place, as we know that excessive screen time can have an impact on eye healthcare, so will the Minister commit to ensuring that any forthcoming guidance addresses eye health and eye conditions such as dry eye disease and myopia?

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank my hon. Friend for her important campaigning work in this area and for her important question. I am happy to give her that assurance, and I would be delighted to meet her to discuss this matter in more detail.

[Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)]

I was a secondary school teacher before I came to this place, and even 10 years ago, although the school guidance was that mobile phones should not be in classrooms, enforcing that was a daily struggle. The presence of mobile phones undermines what schools are trying to do, causing distraction, potentially enabling cyber-bullying and exposing students to potentially harmful online content. We have been through all this. Sometimes it is important that guidance is supported by law, so will the Government turn the existing guidance into law and ban phones in schools?

[Olivia Bailey]

In the consultation we have announced today, we are consulting on whether a statutory ban is needed, but the action that we have taken addresses the root cause of the problem: the clarity of mobile phone policies and how well they are enforced. The vast majority of schools have a ban in place, but they are just not sufficiently effective. That is what we are working to address.

[Jack Rankin (Windsor) (Con)]

The Secretary of State has bent over backwards to avoid backing a ban on mobile phones in schools. Her Back Benchers are making their views clear, so can she confirm whether she will be whipping them next week to vote against our amendment to ban phones in schools? We look forward to the Government’s 17th U-turn in as many months—the 18th if the one on Iran counts—but if a U-turn is not coming, why does she continue to stand in the way of parents, heads and her own Back Benchers, who simply want classrooms free from disruption?

[Olivia Bailey]

I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his place, but I am afraid he did not listen to the answer I just gave on this exact topic, which is that, in the consultation we announced today, we are consulting on whether a statutory ban is needed. Secondly, it is my firm belief that we have addressed the root cause of the problem, which is that the policies are not sufficiently clear and that they are not being well enough enforced. That is what we are doing by asking Ofsted to inspect these policies, and we are supporting schools through our attendance and behaviour hubs.

[Rosie Duffield (Canterbury) (Ind)]

5. What assessment she has made of the adequacy of SEND provision in Kent.

--- Later in debate ---

[Gareth Bacon (Orpington) (Con)]

9. What steps she has taken to help improve nursery provision in Greater London.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

Our best start in life strategy is expanding access to childcare, saving working families £7,500 a year and getting record proportions of children ready for school. We work closely with local authorities to ensure the quality and sufficiency of childcare, including across Greater London.

[Gareth Bacon]

I thank the Minister for her response. Late last year, with relatively little notice, the trustees of a pre-school in my constituency, Crofton Early Learners, decided to close the pre-school, meaning that 40 sets of parents had a very anxious Christmas wondering and worrying about what childcare they would have in the new year. The very good news is that—thanks to the dedicated work of former staff, volunteers and parents—a new setting called Phoenix Early Learners was opened within just six weeks. Will the Minister join me in thanking both Ofsted and the Charity Commission for fast-tracking the paperwork necessary, and in paying tribute to the staff, carers, volunteers and new trustees of the new early learning centre for all the great work they have done for the local community?

[Olivia Bailey]

Absolutely. I congratulate the hon. Gentleman and all the parents and volunteers, Ofsted, and the early years professionals who have opened at impressive speed what sounds like a fantastic new provision for their community. I am pleased that the Government’s investment in childcare, which will total £9.5 billion this year, is helping ensure that more children have a fantastic early education and are supported to get ready for school.

[Mrs Elsie Blundell (Heywood and Middleton North) (Lab)]

10. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to ensure that local authorities in financial difficulty can deliver effective speech and language therapy for children with SEND.

--- Later in debate ---

[Noah Law (St Austell and Newquay) (Lab)]

12. What steps she has taken to roll out Best Start free breakfast clubs.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

Every primary school in England will have a free breakfast club by the end of this Parliament, giving children a healthy breakfast and a great soft start to the day and improving attainment and attendance. Another 2,000 schools will open free breakfast clubs this year, including Pondhu primary school in my hon. Friend’s constituency.

[Noah Law]

I am delighted that Pondhu primary school in my constituency has been a trailblazer for not just our Government’s free breakfast clubs scheme, but investment in school nurseries, which has been a resounding success. What assessment has the Minister made of the positive impacts of our free breakfast clubs programme on children and their families?

[Olivia Bailey]

It was a pleasure to spend time with my hon. Friend in his constituency recently, where he and I both enjoyed a range of activities with the brilliant Pinky, including our enthusiastic attempts at axe chopping. I know that my hon. Friend has worked really hard to support and encourage schools in his constituency to participate in our school-based nurseries and breakfast clubs programmes, and I thank him for that. In the south-west, we have opened 30 school-based nurseries and nearly 100 breakfast clubs, supporting thousands of children in St Austell and beyond to get the very best start in life.

[Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)]

The roll-out of free breakfast clubs and the Government’s wider child poverty strategy are supposed to be driven by data, yet the Department does not even hold information on which councils in England have implemented auto-enrolment for free school meals. If the Government do not hold that basic data, which would show that Devon has done so and given £1.5 million in pupil premium but that Plymouth has delayed doing so until 2026-27, how can the Government be trusted to roll out further taxpayer-funded support—such as free breakfast clubs—and how can they prove the impact that that has on child poverty?

[Olivia Bailey]

All our programmes are evidence based. When it comes to breakfast clubs, we know the data shows us that they will drive up attainment and improve attendance for our schoolchildren.

[James MacCleary (Lewes) (LD)]

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

--- Later in debate ---

[Darren Paffey (Southampton Itchen) (Lab)]

Literacy levels among Southampton’s children remain a challenge, and I commend the work of so many teachers in attempting to close that gap. Can the Minister say how schools in my constituency can best engage with the National Year of Reading? Will she join me in welcoming plans for a Southampton literary festival to inspire a lifelong love of reading in every child in Southampton?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

I welcome and celebrate the launch of the Southampton literary festival by Bitterne Park school, and I thank my hon. Friend for all his advocacy in his constituency. The National Year of Reading is packed full of exciting events for all to participate in, and I encourage Members to do so.

[Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)]

The children of Banks Lane junior school recently visited the parliamentary education establishment, and kindly invited me along. They were fizzing with enthusiasm and excitement for their learning. We know that attitudes to money are embedded at a really young age, so it is welcome that financial education is included in the curriculum and assessment review. We also know that 80% of teachers are reporting heavy workloads. What additional funding and training is coming in to ensure that children get what they need?

--- Later in debate ---

[Olivia Bailey]

I am sorry to hear about the closure of the school in the right hon. Lady’s constituency, but closures of private schools have been in line with historical trends. All pupils are entitled to a state school place, and the right hon. Lady should contact the local authority to discuss this further.

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

I welcome the Education Secretary’s commitment to inclusion, but many children in York are not in school because of the disciplinary processes run by multi-academy trusts and the culture that ensues. What will she do to ensure that leaders in such trusts are held to account for that?

Independent Faith Schools: VAT

Olivia Bailey Excerpts

Thursday 26th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. I thank all hon. Members for attending, and particularly the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for securing this debate and for his characteristically engaging speech. I am grateful for the suggestions that he made, which have all been noted. I also congratulate his staff member, who is in the Public Gallery, on her super-human efforts with the volume of wonderful speeches she produces. It was great that the hon. Member was able to congratulate her as well. While I perhaps did not agree with the content of the speech given by the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Joy Morrissey), I admire the speed with which she assembled it here today.

Education matters. It sits at the very heart of this Government’s mission to break down barriers to opportunity, ensuring every child, wherever they live and whatever their background, has the best possible start in life and access to a high-quality education. Our priority is clear: to raise school standards for every child. I believe that this is a priority shared by colleagues across the House, as is clear from the speeches in this debate.

The Government value the contribution that faith schools make to our diverse education system. Faith schools, whether private or state funded, have long played, and continue to play, a really vital role. We continue to work closely with faith school providers, representative organisations and local authorities to find ways to support private faith schools. The Government respect parental choice, and faith schools in the private and state sectors will remain part of that choice.

The truth is, however, that we inherited a dire fiscal situation from the previous Government, and families, including those in faith communities, were dealing with sky-high interest rates, underfunded public services and a broken NHS. That is why we have taken some fair and necessary decisions on tax, which will stabilise public finances and secure the additional funding required to deliver on our commitments to education and young people. The measure that we are discussing will raise essential revenue that will be invested in our public services, such as the £1.7 billion increase to the core schools budget in 2026-27, taking core school funding to £67 billion compared with £65.3 billion in 2025-26.

The Government carefully considered a range of representations made by faith schools, including a proposal for a low-fee carve out. However, the Government concluded that in line with the principles of protecting revenue and fairness, faith schools should remain in scope of the VAT policy. We understand that some parents make the decision to send their child to a private school because of its particular faith ethos, and because they feel that a particular type of school is better able to meet their child’s needs than their place in the state sector. It is the case, however, that all children of compulsory school age are entitled to a state-funded school place should they require one, and of all the faith schools in England, around one third are state funded.

We are also supporting faith groups in their engagement with local authorities to explore options for those private faith schools that are interested in joining the state-funded sector. Where there is a sustainable need, local authorities can bring schools serving particular faith communities into the state sector as voluntary-aided schools, and the school must meet all required standards within the state-funded sector. Since the introduction of the VAT policy, we are aware of one private faith school that has joined the state sector as a voluntary-aided maintained faith school, opening in September 2025.

Furthermore, not all income received by smaller faith schools will be subject to VAT. Some faith schools are likely to be less impacted by changes to private schools tax, where some of their income is derived from other sources, such as voluntary donations or support from religious organisations. That is because VAT is out of scope for donations that are freely given and where there is no reciprocal obligation. That means that some private faith schools may be affected proportionately less than others.

All private schools, including private faith schools, can decide for themselves how to manage the additional cost of VAT. There are a variety of ways in which a school may choose to do that. For example, they may reduce their surpluses or reserves, make savings on non-essential expenditure or, like any VAT-registered organisation, reclaim input VAT on their costs.

[Jim Shannon]

Respectfully, it is not about how the schools can do things; it is about the parents who make that sacrifice so that their children can get to those schools. I suggest—the Minister has it in front of her—a simple solution, which is to introduce a VAT registration threshold that is below the state funding benchmark. I understand that the Minister does not have the final say, but my No. 1 request would be for her to ask the relevant Minister whether they would consider reviewing that idea as a possible solution. I think I gave the figures for the savings and costs. If everybody went to state schools, it would cost even more. [Interruption.] I am sorry, Sir Alec, but that is the point I am trying to make.

[Olivia Bailey]

The hon. Gentleman made his case well in his speech earlier, and he makes it again now. The Government have carefully considered the options that he has put forward today. I have heard all of his points and they have been noted by my officials.

Private schools have steadily increased average fees by 75% in real terms since 2000, and that has not affected pupil numbers. Fee increases can also reflect wider cost pressures beyond VAT and business rates.

The Government are closely monitoring the impact of VAT policy on the private school sector. We remain confident in the estimates made when this policy was introduced, which said that the number of private school closures was expected to remain relatively low and influenced by various factors, not just by the VAT policy. On average, 74 private schools, including independent special schools, have closed per year over the past 20 years. However, only 60 private schools closed in academic year 2024-25, which is the school year that the VAT changes were introduced. That means that school closures announced thus far remain firmly within historical patterns and sit comfortably within our expectations. Indeed, even after the VAT policy came into effect, private schools continued to open in England. In the same time period—between 1 September 2024 and 31 August 2025—106 private schools registered and opened.

We are confident that the state sector can accommodate any additional pupils, including any pupils transferring from private state schools.

[Sir Ashley Fox]

The justification for this tax given in the Labour party manifesto was to raise revenue to employ more teachers in the state sector, yet we now know that in November 2025, there were 1,400 fewer teachers than 12 months previously. Can the Minister tell us where the money has gone?

[Olivia Bailey]

I will. I am just coming on to that, if you will bear with me. I am grateful for that. [Interruption.] Did I do something wrong, Sir Alec? I apologise.

[Sir Alec Shelbrooke (in the Chair)]

Order. The word “you” has crept into a couple of speeches today. I am not responsible for any decisions, so please, let us not use it. I give everyone a timely reminder that we do not use the word “you”.

[Olivia Bailey]

It is a very timely reminder. I am grateful to you, Sir Alec. I thank the hon. Member for Bridgwater (Sir Ashley Fox) for his intervention. He raises an important point. I have just skipped through my notes, and I realise that I will not be coming on to that point; I have, in fact, already covered it. I will just repeat that we are managing to increase the schools budget significantly as a consequence of this policy, which has also raised significantly more than our initial estimates. We are also recruiting teachers, on which more detail was published in our schools White Paper earlier this week.

In closing, I once again thank the hon. Member for Strangford for securing this debate, and I thank Members from across the House for their contributions this afternoon. As they eloquently outlined in their speeches, independent schools, including faith schools, make a valuable contribution to our diverse education system. The Government have made necessary and fair choices to safeguard the public finances, invest in our public services and increase funding for our schools. We will keep working with faith groups, school leaders and local authorities to ensure that every child in this country has access to a high-quality education.

Minister for Men and Boys

Olivia Bailey Excerpts

Wednesday 25th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Lee Anderson (Ashfield) (Reform)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg. I give huge thanks to the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans) for securing this very important debate. The question is: do we need a Minister for men and boys? I would say that ideally we do not, but we already have a Minister for women—in fact, we have the Women and Equalities Committee. We have to ask ourselves why we need these things especially for women. Is perhaps because, as a society, we feel that women are discriminated against? I think they probably are—we all know that and all agree with that. That is one of the reasons I sat on the Women and Equalities Committee in the last Parliament. But what about men? What about men and boys? What about young boys? What about white working-class young boys?

Boys and young men have historically been very useful to our society, especially when we needed coal mined, steel made in mills in the north, or factories filled with labourers to do back-breaking hard work. Young men and boys were also very useful when it came to fighting wars. They were dragged away from their towns and villages to be killed on a foreign battlefield. Even now, we send young lads to foreign fields, and they come back—at least some of them do—missing legs or arms. Even worse, some come back in a coffin, and we all say, “What a great young man he was. What a lot of great friends he had. He was a comrade. He was brave,” and so on, and in a few days we forget about him, and we leave the family to pick up the pieces and live a lifetime of grief. But these days, a lot of young men have no idea what they will do with their lives when they leave school. The pits and the coalmines have gone. Industry has declined. Net zero is killing once thriving industries in the north and the midlands—industries that took young men straight from school into the workplace, where they would spend 30 or 40 years.

Meanwhile the lawmakers in this place—some idiotic lawmakers sometimes—do not have a clue about what young men and boys are going through. Instead, they talk about white privilege, and they tell boys that they need to go on courses to not be misogynistic. That is absolutely shameful. We take all the opportunities away from young men and boys and then tell them that they are to blame for the way women are tret in this country. That is nonsense. The Centre for Social Justice tells us that boys and men are increasingly falling behind in education, employment and social wellbeing—a phenomenon often called a hidden crisis. Well, it is not a hidden crisis; it is out there in plain sight. Girls consistently outperform boys at school. We have rising loneliness, a lack of opportunities and a lack of positive role models for young men, especially in working-class communities.

Who is to blame for all this? I think this place is to blame—I truly do. We have produced a benefits system that does not encourage the family unit any more. Sometimes it is more profitable to be a single parent at home—it is mainly women, if we are honest. A lot of these women are left to bring up boys on their own, with no male role model in the house. These young boys then go to infant school and primary school, where we hardly ever see a male teacher any more. In some of the schools I visit, there is not a single male teacher. The first proper role model that some of these young lads see is when they get to senior school. It is absolutely shocking. Is it any wonder that our young men are confused and do not have any direction? In fact, some of the only interactions these young men have are with the local bobby, when they have been in trouble on the street.

It was different for me in my day. I grew up listening to my dad’s alarm clock going off every morning at 5 o’clock. He would get up and go and do a shift down the pit. Then, a few years later, he would get me up, and I would go down the pit with my dad. He was my role model. Every single lad in our village had a role model, because of the family unit. My dad was my role model, and for many other kids in the village, their dads were theirs.

I strongly believe that this place has broken our society, and it never takes any responsibility. We have MPs in this place, including the Prime Minister—I want to have a go now—telling young boys that they must watch BBC programmes like “Adolescence” because of the way women are treated. We are blaming young boys for the way women are treated. I would say, yes, let them watch this programme, but make girls watch it as well. As a society, we should all be watching these things. We need a Minister for young men and boys to put right the wrongs created in this place.

[The Minister for Equalities (Olivia Bailey)]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his interesting speech. His party has recently announced that it would like to scrap the Department for women and equalities, so how does his statement sit with that commitment? He also wants to scrap the Equality Act 2010. Does he recognise that the Act actually protects men and boys from discrimination on the basis of their sex?

[Lee Anderson]

I think we could make the Equality Act much better. We do not have to have an Equality Act in this country. On the Minister’s first point, in this country we should not really need a Minister for women, and we should not really need a Minister for men. We should probably have a Minister for people—as simple as that. Why are we discriminating? Why are we separating the two? We are all human beings. We are all people.

I talk about young men having no direction, and I want to talk about one particular group. Young men in the care system go through foster care and care homes from four or five years old. Some of them lead terrible lives. They are pushed from pillar to post. I know, because I worked in a hostel for homeless young people before I came to this place. I saw at first hand these kids coming to us at 16 years old—young men and girls. Like I say, they had been pushed from pillar to post, had no positive role model in their lives and had been in trouble with the police. As a society, we completely let down these young men. Where did they go when they left the hostel? I’ll tell you where they went: mainly to prison. We could do very little with them in the two years that we had them, because they had had a lifetime of upset, with their parents and grandparents abandoning them.

I always say that it would have been cheaper to take these young kids, at four and five, out of the care system and give them a proper education. Put them in a boarding school, give them the best training possible, and break the poverty cycle. Give them a career and a chance in life, but we do not. We put them through the care system, and then sometimes through the penal system. Every single one of the girls who left the hostel was pregnant. Do we know why that is? I’ll tell you why: it was the only way they could get a house—a council house—and a regular supply of benefits. What a terrible thing we are doing in this country. This place has created a society in which young people are failing, and we have the cheek to sit here, scratching our heads, wondering how we can put it right.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

It is always an honour to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg. I express my gratitude to the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans) for opening the debate and for his commitment to tackling the issues facing many men and boys. I thank him and other hon. Members, whose thoughtful and varied contributions have led to a worthwhile debate and showed the range of challenges men encounter in today’s world, including problems with their health, their work, their family life or harmful influences online.

Specific ministerial positions and titles are, of course, a matter for the Prime Minister, so I am sure hon. Members will forgive me for not commenting on that in detail, but I assure them that not having the word “men” in our titles does not prevent me or any of my colleagues from working hard to support men and boys across our country. Indeed, two weeks ago, I had the pleasure of attending a thought-provoking debate on educational outcomes for boys, where I was able to share some of what the Government are doing about the challenges facing boys in schools.

[Lee Anderson]

It is great that the Minister is doing work with young boys, but does she agree that boys can be boys and girls can be girls, especially growing up through school? Does she think it is helpful that boys are told they can go to school in dresses?

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank the hon. Member for his contribution. I think it is important that we support children to have a happy, healthy and enjoyable childhood.

As a mum of two boys, I am well aware of the challenges facing our boys in schools, and as an Equalities Minister, I am pleased to be able to work with colleagues across Government to take action on those issues. The Equality Act 2010 requires the interests of both and women to be considered when all Ministers make decisions and when officials implement policies. We are committed to supporting men and boys in all areas where they face disadvantage, recognising that too many are really struggling with the challenges in our society today.

[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.

[Tessa Munt]

Does the Minister believe that men can bring up children really well as well?

[Olivia Bailey]

I absolutely do, and I thank the hon. Member for that important intervention.

Role models begin in schools, which is why it is important that we address the under-representation of men across the education workforce. Although this is broadly in line with international trends, we want to see more male teachers in our classrooms and in other education settings. To attract more men into teaching and address barriers, we ensure that men are featured regularly in the teacher recruitment marketing campaign “Every Lesson Shapes a Life”, with men in the focal role in its last two TV campaigns. The campaign to promote early years careers has also produced new adverts specifically to target men.

Outside of education, too many young men today are struggling with loneliness, and we know the devastating consequences that that can have for both their mental health and our communities. Our plans for improving social connection and reducing loneliness are embedded across Government policy, including through the national youth strategy and the men’s health strategy. The Government are also investing more than £300,000 to help Rugby League Cares give boys and young men a renewed sense of community, purpose and belonging.

A number of other comments were made in the debate. I am conscious of time, but the hon. Member for Mid Leicestershire talked about homelessness and the criminal justice system. My hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich talked about the role of family hubs, and today I was in a fantastic family hub in Camden, where staff talked to me about the work they are doing with fathers, which is really exciting and a key part of our work moving forward.

The hon. Member for Wells and Mendip Hills asked for an update on the parental leave review. The review will run for approximately 18 months, but I will be happy to follow up in writing if she would like further details.

[Mims Davies]

The Minister has rightly outlined strategies and different strands across Government. Could she set out whether there those strategies are driving at any particular outcomes, including around young offenders and other areas, so that we can track whether they are having the desired outcomes in our constituencies?

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank the hon. Lady for her helpful intervention. I point back to the work the Deputy Prime Minister is doing, as well as to the summit the Prime Minister will be doing later this year.

In conclusion, I thank again all hon. Members who have spoken in today’s important debate. Whether as role models, allies or mentors, men can inspire and encourage us all. As we celebrate the wonderful contributions that men and boys make to their families, schools, communities and workplaces, we must work together to help them tackle the challenges they face in life. It is clear that Members across the House share our goal of making sure that men and boys are given the support they need.

LGBT+ History Month

Olivia Bailey Excerpts

Thursday 12th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Equalities (Olivia Bailey)]

I am proud to be able to contribute to this important annual tradition, and to do so as the Minister for LGBT+ equality. I thank my hon. Friends the Members for Jarrow and Gateshead East (Kate Osborne) and for Nottingham East (Nadia Whittome) for sponsoring the debate, and I applaud them both for their tireless work advocating for the LGBT+ community and for their powerful and important speeches this afternoon.

This has been a fantastic debate, packed with pride and heartwarming stories. In the words of the motto of the LGBT Foundation, which I visited earlier this week in Manchester and promised I would get on the record, it has been a debate full of “queer hope and joy”. My hon. Friend the Member for Jarrow and Gateshead East talked about Out North East and the new ONE Centre in her constituency, which I am looking forward to visiting, just as I am looking forward to visiting the “Osborne room”.

My hon. Friends the Members for Stratford and Bow (Uma Kumaran), for Glasgow North (Martin Rhodes) and for Cities of London and Westminster (Rachel Blake) told wonderful stories about LGBT history and the wonderful LGBT spaces in their constituencies. I say to my hon. Friend the Member for Cities of London and Westminster that I was asked the other day to reflect on my favourite queer space, and I sadly realised that as a firmly middle-aged lesbian with two children, my favourite queer space is now my living room.

My hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth (Rachel Taylor) told some wonderful stories and remembered the King opening the armed forces memorial, which was a really powerful moment. My hon. Friend the Member for Exeter (Steve Race) gave us a powerful reminder of the difference that progress has made to his life and to the lives of his constituents.

[Liam Conlon]

I thank the Minister for celebrating and acknowledging the contributions that other Members have made. Graham and Vinny, from Kings Hall Road in Beckenham and Penge, hold a Pride street party every summer, and it gets bigger and bigger every year. Among the entertainment this year, they had the London Gay Men’s Chorus and several cardboard cut-outs of Kylie Minogue, and well over 1,000 people attended. As well as being a day of fun, I believe that it sends a really powerful and important message of tolerance and inclusion. Does the Minister agree?

[Olivia Bailey]

I absolutely do agree. I thank my hon. Friend for sharing that with us, and I congratulate Graham and Vinny on all their work.

There has been a consistent theme in the contributions this afternoon: the stories that many Members have told of the fear, shame and anxiety being felt by many of their LGBT+ constituents, particularly their trans constituents. My hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes) made a powerful speech on the cost of being yourself and the importance of listening to young trans people. My hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) made an important speech about the political weaponisation of our identities, with some people saying that families like mine are less stable. Such stories are painful to hear, and I want to say very clearly that I recognise the fear and anxiety that LGBT+ people are feeling at the moment. I feel it too, but this Government will always stand with LGBT+ people against the politics of division and hate, and we will protect and extend LGBT+ rights.

We heard a wide range of other contributions this afternoon. A number of colleagues mentioned the EHRC guidance and asked for an update on timings. The Government are considering this issue very carefully and will bring forward an update as soon as we are able to do so. My hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth, who has been a powerful campaigner, talked about the Government’s proud commitment to address the issue of hate crime; I am looking forward to the Government equalising the hate crime laws in the House of Lords.

My hon. Friend the Member for Clapham and Brixton Hill (Bell Ribeiro-Addy) gave a powerful speech on the damage done by conversion practices. Let me be clear: they are a form of abuse, and this Government will ban them. On the timelines, I am working on the legislation with the urgency that every Member of this House expects of me, and will bring it forward as soon as possible.

[Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)]

Will the Minister take this opportunity to congratulate the hon. Member for Jarrow and Gateshead East (Kate Osborne), who took a very delicate and sensitive report on abusive conversion practices through the Council of Europe two weeks ago and managed to receive support from pretty much all Members from across the Chamber, with the exception of the hard right? She did it with such sensitivity and skill, and perhaps this is an opportunity to thank her for that.

[Olivia Bailey]

I am extremely grateful to my hon. Friend for giving me that opportunity. I have congratulated my hon. Friend the Member for Jarrow and Gateshead East on her important work on this vital topic, and I do so again on the record.

I also take this opportunity to thank my hon. Friend the Member for Llanelli (Dame Nia Griffith)—I have been in trouble on my pronunciation of her constituency before—for her phenomenal work as my predecessor in this role. She rightly challenged me to make the most of the European IDAHOT conference that we will host next year, and I would like to take that challenge from her and say that we will absolutely commit to doing so. I will say some more about that in a moment.

On days like today I am reminded of the consequence of this place. As we have heard, it was hon. Members like us in this very Chamber who decriminalised homosexuality, scrapped section 28 and legalised equal marriage, but it was also here in this Chamber that those laws were first made. For me, that is an important reminder of the fragility of our progress and the importance of our role. In this place, we must never forget how important it is to make the case for our rights, and hon. Members have done that brilliantly today.

I am very proud to be a member of the gayest Parliament ever and to be a member of a Government who will advance LGBT+ rights. We have righted the historical wrongs committed against LGBT veterans, funded LGBT+ violence against women and girls services and pledged to end HIV transmissions by 2030. This morning, I visited the fantastic 56 Dean Street, in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Cities of London and Westminster, to take an HIV test myself to mark National HIV Testing Week. I thank the staff at 56 Dean Street for their fantastic work, and I urge all hon. Members to encourage their constituents to go online and get a free HIV test this week.

While I am proud of the things we have done, I am most proud of the things that we will do, including fulfilling our manifesto commitment to equalise hate crime laws, bringing forward our trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices and supporting LGBT+ rights on the world stage. We are funding global LGBT+ partnerships, and we will be proudly hosting the 2027 European IDAHOT forum, taking our place on the world stage in the fight for LGBT+ equality. I am looking forward to doing all this in partnership with those in our wonderful LGBT+ sector, whom I was delighted to invite to Downing Street to meet the Prime Minister the other week.

In LGBT History Month, we are encouraged to remember the iconic trailblazers who fought for our rights such as Mark Ashton, Maureen Colquhoun, Chris Smith, Roberta Cowell, the Tower Hamlets Lesbian and Gay Group and the others we have heard about today. I also think it is important that we remember the people who did not make it into the history books, because our history is one of everyday resistance and courage—people choosing to link hands in the street, people choosing to stand up for their community and people choosing pride over shame. I think it is important that we remember that everything we do in this place is built on that courage, and that courage is needed now more than ever.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

The Minister will no doubt want to pay tribute to the late Lord Etherton and the excellent work he did in his 2023 review, in which there were 49 recommendations. What progress are the Government making on those recommendations? I have received permission from the right hon. Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry) to mention that, because as the Minister will know, we are working on a cross-party basis to get a new review of the UK intelligence community, as the Etherton review did not look at the intelligence agencies. It may well have touched on defence intelligence, but not on other parts of the UK intelligence community. Could the Minister update us on the 49 recommendations, and will she join me, in a cross-party spirit, in hoping that the Government will somewhere have the space to look at the courageous men and women who served in our intelligence community between 1967 and 2000, and get justice for them?

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank the right hon. Member for that intervention. I do pay tribute to Lord Etherton, and the Government are driving forward on all the recommendations of that review. I would be delighted to meet the right hon. Member to discuss the important points he makes and to work on a cross-party basis on this important issue.

As I was saying, that courage is needed now more than ever. Around the world, hostility and violence are rising and hard-won protections are being rolled back. For the first time in recent years, the number of jurisdictions that criminalise LGBT+ people has risen—from 62 to 65 in the past year alone. In this country, LGBT+ people are facing new and evolving challenges. I have spoken to LGBT+ organisations across the country about the rise of dangerous chemsex, online harassment, mental health concerns and overwhelmed support services. In our politics, we are contending with the rise of a populist right that thrives on the politics of division.

We will stand against the politics of division and hate, because our history teaches us that our stories are our own, claimed and retold by us, not just to remember but as a rallying call to never lose hope that love and pride will conquer fear and prejudice. We will honour the courage of those who have come before us and leave this place better for those who come after us. I will be very proud to work with all hon. Members to do just that.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call Nadia Whittome to quickly wind up.

Nurseries and Early Years Providers: CCTV

Olivia Bailey Excerpts

Wednesday 4th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I thank all hon. Members for attending and contributing to this important debate. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead and Highgate (Tulip Siddiq) on securing the debate, and on her excellent speech. She has fought hard for her constituents following the horrendous case in her constituency, and I thank her for that. She is a true champion for children, for her constituents and for those working in the early years sector who, she rightly says, spend every day thinking about how to keep children safe. I am grateful to her for sharing the views of providers in her constituency with whom she has taken the time to discuss the issue of CCTV, and grateful to her for sharing the harrowing stories that she has shared in this debate, which underline the urgency and significance of the action that we must take. She has made a very powerful case for the use of CCTV.

I look forward to reading and hearing about the outcomes of the important inquiry of the Education Committee, chaired by my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes). The question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Altrincham and Sale West (Mr Rand) will be considered by the panel that we are currently getting under way, which I shall say a bit more about. My hon. Friend the Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Rachel Blake) talked about the role of Ofsted. That is at the front of the Government’s mind. We have increased the frequency of Ofsted inspections in early years settings, and in our review we will continue to consider the points that she raised. My hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead and Highgate asked a number of questions that I address in the speech that I have prepared; I will come on to those answers.

Nothing is more important, for me and for this Government, than the safety of our children. The Department for Education is constantly working to ensure that children in early years settings benefit from the highest possible safeguarding standards. In September, we strengthened the rules to cover safer recruitment, what to do in the event of child absences, whistleblowing procedures, safer eating and paediatric first aid training. We also introduced new mandatory safeguarding training requirements, so that all early years educators must complete training that meets our statutory criteria.

On CCTV, we are acting with the urgency that every hon. Member in this debate rightly expects. In December, the Secretary of State for Education announced that she would appoint an expert advisory panel to review how digital devices and CCTV are used in early years settings, from a safeguarding perspective. I can now go into further details on the expertise that the panel will hold, how it will operate and the panel’s objectives.

The panel will meet monthly, with the first meeting planned for later this month. It will consider key points including, but not limited to, whether CCTV should be mandated in early years settings, CCTV’s role as part of a setting’s wider safeguarding measures, how CCTV and digital devices should be managed to ensure that children’s privacy is protected alongside their safety, and what systems, training and safeguards are necessary to address concerns such as cyber-security and the possible misuse of images. We must remember that, sadly, image-generating technology can be used for harm as well as for good, and we have seen, in some of those awful cases, that the presence of CCTV has not prevented harm. Digital devices within settings have been used to generate unlawful images and perpetrate abuse. We have seen that nurseries and early years settings face risks from hackers, such as in the case faced by a nursery chain last year. For those reasons, we are working across Government to ensure that all possible angles are considered, and that any recommended changes, including those relating to any mandatory CCTV requirements, have a unified cross-Government response so that any changes are brought in with the utmost care.

The panel will consist of representatives from both the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and from the Home Office, along with relevant bodies such as the Information Commissioner’s Office and the Office of the Children’s Commissioner. In addition, the National Police Chiefs’ Council will be invited, so that CCTV’s use as evidence, best practice and potential misuse are covered. It is also key that the voices of all early years providers are heard in our review, along with those of academic experts in early years safeguarding and surveillance technology. Most importantly of all, I want the voices of parents and of hon. Members advocating in this debate to be at the heart of the review. I will be in touch with any hon. Member in this debate who would like to know more about how they can be involved as soon as possible.

[Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)]

I want to publicly thank the Minister for attending a roundtable with the parents of Twickenham Green nursery victims last year. The perpetrator is to be deported tomorrow, and many of those parents feel that justice has not been served, but the best justice would be to make sure that such a case does not happen again, so I welcome the panel. Will the Minister assure me and my hon. Friend the Member for Cheadle (Mr Morrison), who represents the parents of baby Gigi Meehan, that we can feed into that panel on behalf of those parents to make sure that their concerns and views are heard, and that we have learned the lessons from the CCTV pilot rollout in Australia?

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank the hon. Member for her campaigning for her constituents, and for the powerful roundtable that she invited me to. I can reassure her that, as I just said, any parent or hon. Member in this debate who would like to contribute to the work of that panel will have the opportunity to do so. I will be in touch to explain how that will happen.

Before I conclude, I would like to say a word about safer sleep. In addition to calls for mandatory CCTV, the Campaign for Gigi has called for clear, statutory safe-sleep guidance for early years settings. My policy officials have worked with safe-sleep experts, including the Lullaby Trust, on proposed new wording for the early years foundation stage, which will add more detail without providers’ needing to refer to other guidance. We plan to make those changes as soon as possible.

In closing, I again thank all hon. Members for their passion and dedication.

[Munira Wilson]

I know we are talking about CCTV, but another important thing that the Australian Government have just introduced is a register for early years providers, so that perpetrators can be stopped from going on to hurt other young victims, as happened in the Twickenham Green nursery case of Roksana Lecka. Will the Minister and her Government also look at having a register for early years practitioners in the UK?

--- Later in debate ---

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank the hon. Member for that important intervention. We do have a few more moments, if anyone else would like to intervene on these topics. We are considering all the evidence; nothing is off the table for me as I think about how to keep our children safe.

[Rachel Blake]

One issue I would like explored is the role of local authorities in safeguarding. That issue has come up in some work I have been doing on this subject, where a gap or lack of communication is perceived between the different roles of Ofsted and local authorities. I welcome the fact that the Minister has been clear that Ofsted inspections are increasing and are part of the review. It is important that local authorities are clear about their roles with early years settings.

[Olivia Bailey]

My hon. Friend makes an important point. That is something the Government are focused on. In addition to frequency, we have also increased funding for Ofsted. There are also ongoing local reviews of some of the horrendous cases we have seen, from which we will also learn lessons.

I hope that the ongoing and planned work that I have highlighted today provides reassurance that, across Government, we are working urgently to implement the most effective and evidence-based changes to early years safeguarding, to ensure the most important thing of all—that our children are safe. I thank everyone for their contributions today.

Question put and agreed to.

Educational Outcomes: Disadvantaged Boys and Young Men

Olivia Bailey Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd February 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Sir John. As the mum of two boys—and two boys with two mums—I express my gratitude to my hon. Friend the Member for Hitchin (Alistair Strathern) for securing this valuable debate. His powerful speech made a clear case for the importance of supporting boys to succeed in our education system. I congratulate him on the launch of his new group on men and boys and hear his powerful argument that this is a progressive cause. I have no doubt that he was an excellent teacher and role model for the boys in his class. He made lots of powerful arguments in his speech, including about the importance of strength-based relational work when talking about Football Beyond Borders, Beyond Equality and Boys’ Impact.

My hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Luke Murphy) talked about the GOAT Boys scheme as another good example of work that is happening across our country, and my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Leigh Ingham) made a powerful argument about the importance of early support for disadvantaged boys. Boys deserve that support early, and should not just be discounted as having behavioural problems. My hon. Friend the Member for Nuneaton (Jodie Gosling) talked about the importance of physical activity and the importance of the fantastic scheme that she visited for the armed forces where young boys who have dropped out of school have found the opportunity to contribute and find their place in the world. I thank everyone for their contributions.

We know that there are far too many inequalities in our education system and we have heard today some of the data about working-class boys. Removing barriers to opportunity in education is the driving purpose of my Department. This Government stand for excellence everywhere across education and care, for every child to break the unfair link between background and success, and to deliver opportunity for all. The foundation of our mission is to ensure that every child has the best start in life because, as we have heard today, what happens in children’s earliest years makes the biggest difference to their life chances. On average, 40% of the overall gap between disadvantaged 16-year-olds and their peers had already emerged by the age of five. Higher proportions of girls achieve a good level of development at the end of reception year compared to boys.

In our plan for change, we set an ambitious milestone for this Government: that 75% of children—a record number—will start school ready to learn by 2028. Our “giving every child the best start in life” strategy sets out the immediate steps to do that: making early education and childcare more accessible, improving quality in early education and reception classes, and expanding and strengthening family services.

Once young boys are in school, every child and young person deserves an education that meets their needs—one that is academically stretching, where they feel like they belong and have the opportunity to achieve and thrive no matter their background. However, we know that the current school system is not working for all pupils. Too many are not being included, particularly working-class children, children with special educational needs and disabilities, and every child who could be stretched to go further. That needs to change, which is why our upcoming schools White Paper will set out our vision for a system that delivers educational excellence for each and every child.

My hon. Friend the Member for Hitchin has asked for a strategy for boys in the educational system, and I am sure that the Minister for School Standards would be happy to meet with him to understand how our vision can best support boys to succeed in school. One area where we are really keen to encourage the participation of boys is our National Year of Reading. That 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, as data shows that only one in four boys say that they enjoy reading. To help reach teenage boys effectively, we have recruited a wide range of celebrity ambassadors and partners who many boys follow and engage with. That is alongside £28 million that we have committed to drive standards in reading and writing, particularly for those who need the most support, including boys, who underperform in English.

My hon. Friend the Member for Hitchin also spoke about the importance of role models, and what better role model is there than an inspirational teacher? As part of our drive to recruit 6,500 expert teachers, we are particularly keen to see more male teachers teaching, guiding and leading the boys in their classrooms. We want the profession to attract excellent male teachers who stay and thrive. Of course, that is just as important in the early years, too.

It is also important that we support boys to have strong mental health and a broad and positive understanding of masculinity. As part of that work, we will provide access to specialist mental health professionals in every school by expanding mental health support teams. That will give every child and young person access to early support to address problems before they escalate. Our revised relationships, sex and health education guidance also supports pupils to challenge harmful gender stereotypes.

When our young people leave school, we remain determined to break down barriers to opportunity and widen access to high-quality education and training. That includes our renewed focus on young people who are not in education, employment or training, where we know that the proportion of young men aged 16 to 17 has been higher than that of young women. That is one reason why £34 million has been committed to the NEET prevention package set out in the post-16 education and skills White Paper, including a new risk of NEET indicator tool to help local areas identify and support young people before they disengage. That is backed up by the Government’s £820 million investment in the youth guarantee to support young people to develop skills, access opportunities and transition into meaningful employment.

In closing the debate, I would like to underline this Government’s commitment to breaking down barriers for all and ensuring that all disadvantaged boys and young men receive the support, education and opportunities they deserve. Once again, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hitchin for introducing this important debate, and all my other colleagues for their excellent contributions.

Question put and agreed to.

Key Stage 1 Curriculum

Olivia Bailey Excerpts

Monday 26th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I thank all hon. Members who have attended and contributed to this important debate, and thank all those who signed and engaged with the petition, particularly those who are in the Public Gallery to listen to the debate. I know from conversations with the Minister for School Standards, my hon. Friend the Member for Queen’s Park and Maida Vale (Georgia Gould), who has responsibility for this area but is unfortunately unable to attend this debate due to a prior commitment, that this subject has drawn much attention and support from many constituents.

My primary goal as an Education Minister is to give every child the best possible start in life. I have had the pleasure of visiting primary schools and early years providers across the country, including many wonderful examples in my constituency of Reading West and Mid Berkshire such as Theale Church of England primary school, and Calcot junior school, whose pupils are coming to Parliament later this week. It was clear on all my visits how important play is to younger children’s wellbeing and development. Some of my best days in my job as Minister for Early Education have included being attacked by plastic dinosaurs and racking up my dry cleaning bill in muddy outdoor play areas. It has been a privilege to listen to hon. Members’ thoughtful contributions and hear about the excellent work being done in their constituencies.

The hon. Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) started off the debate wonderfully by reminding us that the best sound in the world is that of children playing at break time and lunch time—I wholeheartedly agree. She also drew on a theme that was important throughout the debate: the distinction between play-based learning and enrichment. The Government accept that distinction.

My hon. Friend the Member for Hastings and Rye (Helena Dollimore) has been running a fantastic campaign in her constituency against the closure of playgrounds. The Government are determined to do something about such closures, and we committed £18 million to that very issue in the Budget. Other Members, including my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), touched on that issue.

We have had fantastic contributions, which I enjoyed listening to, from my hon. Friends the Members for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes) and for Thurrock (Jen Craft), the hon. Member for South Basildon and East Thurrock (James McMurdock) and my hon. Friend the Member for St Helens North (David Baines) on the importance of play. Of course I add my birthday wishes to my hon. Friend’s son; I hope he gets a chance to have a good play with his new toys.

There have also been important contributions on play and screen time and on school readiness from my hon. Friends the Members for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff), for York Central (Rachael Maskell) and for Wolverhampton North East (Mrs Brackenridge). On the question of ensuring that screens are not displacing play, the Government are determined: we will bring forward the first ever guidance for parents on screen time in early years, take tough action to ensure that there are no phones in any schools so children are not disrupted from play or learning, and work with parents and families to find the right balance so that children at school or nursery are doing what they should be doing: playing.

My hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock touched on the importance of play for early language development. That is very much part of this Government’s plans for school readiness as we strive to ensure that record numbers of children are ready for school. My hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood remembered the great Frank Dobson—a huge advocate for play—and I thank her for bringing his memory to the debate.

England’s early years foundation stage statutory framework recognises the importance of play, setting out that play, both indoors and outdoors, is essential for children’s development, including physical development, communication and language. I agree with colleagues that the impact of play on children’s development and wellbeing does not stop when they reach school age. We will help schools to decide how best to support children’s transition from the early years foundation stage into key stage 1. Some schools continue elements of the pedagogical approach of the EYFS, including play, into year 1 to enable a gradual transition.

Ultimately, however, we believe that teachers are best placed to apply their professional judgment and creativity to meet the pupils’ needs in this area. It is important that teachers have the flexibility to adapt their approach to best support each pupil to obtain the knowledge, skills and understanding that they should do during their education. We re-emphasised that principle in our response to the curriculum and assessment review last November, and that is why it would not be right for us to legislate to make play and continuous provision statutory in the key stage 1 curriculum.

That does not for a second mean that we expect children in year 1 to spend all day every day sat inside, and it certainly does not mean that play is no longer on the agenda. The Government have committed £18 million to upgrade 200 playgrounds across the country, we are amending the national planning policy framework to protect play spaces and my colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care have published the first national guidance on commissioning and delivering health play services. In education, we are also acting to provide children with opportunities outside the classroom. I recognise the important distinction that colleagues have made, but enrichment is also important in schools. We will set out a new core enrichment offer that every school and college should provide for every pupil, delivering access to civic engagement, arts and culture, nature, outdoor and adventure, sport and physical activities, and wider life skills.

Our free breakfast clubs are also a brilliant opportunity for schools to incorporate more play into each day, offering 30 minutes in the morning where children can explore a range of activities, whether kicking a football around or building a Lego masterpiece, in a supportive and calm environment. Across the country, I have seen breakfast clubs where schools are using this Labour Government’s investment to help children explore their imagination and creativity. Of course, breakfast clubs also help to drive improvements in behaviour, attendance and attainment, and provide families with more affordable childcare choices.

I will briefly mention our curriculum reforms. This Government recognise that our children are stepping into a world of huge opportunity, but also of immense change and challenge. We want our new national curriculum to arm them to thrive, building skills that have been spoken about in this debate, such as communication, creativity and social and emotional skills, which can be developed through play and a wide range of enrichment activities.

In conclusion, this Government are serious about the importance of play in childhood, and across Government Departments we are investing in the infrastructure of play and in a transformed early years system. Although we do not agree with the specific suggestion outlined in the petition that play and continuous provision should be mandated as part of the national curriculum at key stage 1, we trust teachers to make the best choices for their students. We thank everyone for coming today and for their thoughtful—

[Rachael Maskell]

Will the Minister give way?

[Olivia Bailey]

My hon. Friend has got me right at the end of my speech, but I will give way to her.

[Rachael Maskell]

I am grateful to the Minister for giving way. Will she go back to the Department and ask people there to engross themselves in the evidence, which overwhelmingly shows the importance of integrating play with learning, and to ensure that we take an evidence-based approach to policy making?

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank my hon. Friend for her last-minute intervention and I can reassure her that we in the Department are immersed and engrossed in the evidence. Our view is that play can be a very important way of helping children to learn. However, we do not think that it is right to mandate it at key stage 1, because we believe that it is important for teachers to have flexibility themselves. Nevertheless, as my hon. Friend knows—and as her sister, a fantastic superhero working in early years, will know—play is embedded as part of the EYFS curriculum.

Mrs Barker, I will leave it there.

Oral Answers to Questions

Olivia Bailey Excerpts

Monday 19th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dr Beccy Cooper (Worthing West) (Lab)]

8. What assessment she has made of the potential impact of flu vaccination levels on rates of school absence in autumn 2025.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

Flu arrived earlier than usual this year, with increases first seen in children and young people. Despite the flu vaccination programme in schools getting off to a strong start in the autumn, with 4 million children vaccinated by early January—an improvement on last year’s figures—attendance levels have been impacted, and the data does show high illness-related absence.

[Dr Cooper]

As flu circulation in children normally starts before adults, and protection through the vaccine lasts much longer in children, the children’s programme should be under way across schools as early as possible from September 1. In my constituency of Worthing West, some schools were vaccinating children in the final weeks before Christmas last year. Will the Minister therefore undertake to work with the Department of Health and Social Care to review the timeliness of flu vaccinations in all schools, and to ensure that they are given as early as possible in the upcoming 2026-27 winter season?

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank my hon. Friend for her hard work for the people of Worthing West. I agree entirely about the importance of schools starting the vaccination programme as early as possible, and I want to reassure her that the Department is working closely with our colleagues at the Department of Health and Social Care, so that next year we can get under way as quickly as possible and in as many schools as possible.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

In Northern Ireland there is only a 52% uptake in flu vaccinations. There are two reasons for that: first, parents want to be sure that it is okay and safe for their children; and secondly, schools sometimes show reluctance to let it happen. Will the Minister share the policy that the hon. Member for Worthing West (Dr Cooper) just outlined with the relevant Minister in Northern Ireland, Paul Givan, to ensure that we can do better in Northern Ireland?

[Olivia Bailey]

The hon. Member will be pleased to know that I will be meeting with the Minister he mentioned later this week on a visit to Northern Ireland, and I will be happy to discuss this matter with him.

[Laurence Turner (Birmingham Northfield) (Lab)]

9. What recent progress her Department has made on establishing the School Support Staff Negotiating Body.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Please, I am trying to help Members from the hon. Lady’s party and others. You have got to work with me. This is topicals.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

I thank the hon. Lady for her question. We are always willing to work across the House on this critical issue, because nothing is more important than our children’s safety. That is why we are proceeding with world-leading action through the Online Safety Act 2023 and why, as the Prime Minister made clear this week, no action is off the table when it comes to children and social media.

[Mr Speaker]

Can I just say to the hon. Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) that it is no use shaking her head and pointing at others? I have to try to help everybody in the Chamber.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Luke Charters (York Outer) (Lab)]

Children are entitled to 30 hours of free childcare from the term after they turn nine months old, meaning that in practice some children are actually 13 months old before they get the funding. I thank Mr P and my constituent Joeli Brearley for raising this issue. Will the Minister meet me to see whether we can fix this injustice?

[Olivia Bailey]

I would be delighted to meet my hon. Friend and his constituent should he wish. As he knows, our record expansion of childcare means that more than 400,000 children benefited from additional childcare this September, and working families are saving up to £7,500 per year. I appreciate the concern that my hon. Friend describes, but termly deadlines enable local authorities and childcare providers to better plan and ensure that sufficient early years places are available.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

There is growing evidence that smartphones in schools are harming behaviour, concentration and outcomes, but leaving it up to headteachers is driving inconsistencies, and only 11% of senior schools have an effective mobile phone ban. Will the Secretary of State publish an assessment of the impact of a statutory ban of smartphones in schools?

[Olivia Bailey]

The Government are completely clear and Government guidance is completely clear that mobile phones have absolutely no place in schools at any point throughout the day. Obviously, we continue to look closely to ensure that the guidance is enforced properly across the country.

[Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Highgate) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State will know about the horrific sexual abuse case in one of my local nurseries. Will she introduce mandatory CCTV in nurseries so that we can use it as a safeguarding tool?

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank my hon. Friend for her advocacy for her constituents in what has been an absolutely appalling case. My thoughts remain with all the children and families who have been affected. The safety of our children comes first, so we are considering the mandatory use of CCTV in early years settings through the review we are getting under way rapidly.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

Victims of convicted paedophile Neil Foden, the former headmaster of Ysgol Friars, are furious that he is still in receipt of his pension even though he is in prison. The forfeiture panel has met and come to a conclusion; when will that conclusion as to whether he continues to receive his pension be published?

[Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)]

Alex Foster, a 17-year-old from Aylesbury, has shared his experiences of social media with me. He says that

“thankfully I was one of the very few who had my phone checked”—

by his parents—but

“my friends told stories of watching beheadings, terrorist material, explicit photos of them being shared”.

Does the Minister agree that we must go further to protect and educate young people when it comes to online harms?

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank my hon. Friend for her advocacy on behalf of her constituents. I agree that nothing is more important than the safety of our children. We are already taking world-leading action with the Online Safety Act 2023, and we have been very clear that nothing is off the table when it comes to children’s safety.