Pride Month

Peter Swallow Excerpts

Thursday 4th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Olivia Bailey]

Sorry—in Harlow. I missed my chance there.

I want to say very clearly from this Dispatch Box that I recognise the community’s fear and anxiety. When public debate becomes toxic, that has consequences in people’s everyday lives—in schools, in workplaces and online. It has consequences for accessing services, and for whether people feel safe simply being themselves— and those consequences all too often manifest in violence and hate.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

The Minister is making a really important point. The fact that the first action of many Reform councils has been to tear down Pride flags and to ban or defund Pride events really speaks to who they are and their values, and I do not think that they are the values of the vast majority of British people.

The Minister is talking about the importance of supporting the LGBTQ+ community in our workplaces. She will know that the Government have today accepted all the recommendations of my noble Friend Lord Mann’s report on antisemitism in the NHS, and I really welcome that. My only question is about political symbols in the NHS. My view is that the Pride flag is not a political symbol, but a symbol of inclusion. Will the Minister work with the Department of Health and Social Care to ensure that when we bring forward the guidance, we do not fall into the trap of labelling Pride flags or Pride symbols as political symbols, but instead continue to allow our NHS to demonstrate that it is an inclusive organisation for the LGBT+ community?

[Olivia Bailey]

First, I associate myself with my hon. Friend’s remarks about the early acts of Reform councils. I also say to him that the NHS is absolutely for all of us, including the LGBT+ community, and I will make sure that Health Ministers have heard his comments.

Hate crime against the LGBT+ community is still far too prevalent. I spoke with those at the LGBT+ domestic violence charity Galop this week, and they have had a 27% increase in hate crime calls in the past year. They told me that hate is becoming more normalised, and perpetrators are becoming more emboldened to target LGBT+ people, whether we are talking about stranger abuse on the streets or physical violence. I am proud that this Government have strengthened protections for LGBT+ people through the Crime and Policing Act 2026, ensuring that our community is properly protected from targeted abuse and violence. We have equalised the law, so that hate crime committed on the basis of sexuality or gender identity is treated the same as racially or religiously motivated hostility. The principle is straight- forward: nobody should live with the fear that their identity makes them a target. This was a commitment in the manifesto on which I was proud to stand for election, and I am delighted that we have delivered it.

I will also be proud to deliver on another manifesto commitment, which is a full trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices. Let us be clear about what conversion practices are. They are a very specific, insidious form of abuse that attempts to change who somebody is. LGBT people are told that who they are is wrong, that it is shameful, and that it can and should be changed. This is not about banning legitimate therapy, explorative conversations or prayer. All people in this country deserve to have access to open conversations about their identity, and this Government are not seeking to change that. What we are seeking to ban is abuse, plain and simple. These abhorrent practices are coercive, degrading and harmful, and they have caused profound trauma to LGBT+ people for decades. I hope Members across the House agree with me that these practices have no place in modern Britain, and will support our work to ban them once and for all.

--- Later in debate ---

[David Burton-Sampson]

Well, I was born in the ’70s!

But I stopped getting angry. I thought, “Let’s turn this into something positive.” I brought together a group of people, and we formed Basildon Mini Pride. In two weeks, we arranged a march through the centre of Basildon town centre to the one local LGBTQ+ nightspot, where we had an afternoon of celebration, and we saw the support there was for us in that community. There is a lot more support than there is hatred. Off the back of that, Basildon Pride was born. I helped to build that into what I am proud to say is a brilliant organisation that operates throughout the year, supporting the LGBTQ+ community in Basildon today. While I might have moved on to Southend, I have remained chair of trustees of Basildon Pride, because it is my baby, and I want to make sure that it continues to thrive and that our amazing volunteers continue to be supported.

Why? Because, as we have heard today, Pride is more important than ever. We have all heard about ILGA-Europe’s rainbow map, showing us consistently sliding from the top place in 2015 down to 22nd place this year. I do not know how others across this place feel, but for me, that is devastating. I have worked hard on the rights of LGBTQ+ people, but I have only made a small contribution. There are many people across this country who, over many years, fought the discrimination we have faced as a community to get us to the great place where we could have civil partnerships, get married and adopt—rights that we did not have—and where hate against us was actually seen as a hate crime. We earned those rights. I stand on the shoulders of giants who fought for those rights before I came along, so it hurts me to see where we are today.

What also hurts me is the rhetoric that we hear across this country today—rhetoric that is driving wedges into our communities, and trying to drive wedges into the LGBTQ+ community. That is not acceptable. Much of that rhetoric comes from Reform UK. I am going to call that party out today, because some of its behaviour in our community is simply unacceptable.

Many buildings will fly the progress pride flag for Pride Month. Last year, Reform UK started threatening law suits against councils that were flying the progress flag. It said that legislation meant that only the rainbow flag, with the six colours, and not the progress pride flag, which includes the triangle that represents the whole LGBTQ+ community, could be flown. Many people have accepted that the progress flag is the flag that we now fly. That flag means so much to so many: when they see it in their community for one day, one week or one month during Pride, they see that we are behind them and we support them.

Reform UK was threatening law suits and councils were having to take that flag down because of a minor difference in the guidance that said that they could fly only the rainbow flag. A group of us are challenging that and working with Ministers at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to try to have the guidance changed. But for goodness’ sake, what does it matter to Reform UK? This is a flag flying that does not harm Reform but shows people in our society that they are included and part of that society. This rhetoric has to stop.

We have seen Reform UK going further in councils that it controls, as has already been mentioned, by taking the rainbow flag down and not allowing it to be flown during Pride Month or at any time. Reform- led councils are even taking the Ukrainian flags down, even though a majority of us in this House are behind supporting people in Ukraine and we show that symbolically by flying that flag across many of our buildings.

[Peter Swallow]

As my hon. Friend knows, local Reform members in Bracknell tried to block Bracknell Forest council flying the progress flag in recent years, and he knows that I share his view that we need a common-sense fix for this. Frankly, it is a waste of council time to be debating this issue and putting it though planning, when we all want a common-sense approach that allows our communities to show that they are inclusive of everyone within those communities. This is a common-sense change that we could make.

[David Burton-Sampson]

I thank my hon. Friend for his support and for working alongside me to get this matter resolved.

--- Later in debate ---

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

It is a huge privilege to follow that incredible contribution from my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West and Leigh (David Burton-Sampson). I think many of us in this place recognise a lot of the experiences he talked about—many of us who know what it is to be holding hands with the person we love as we walk down the street, and then to see someone turn the corner and immediately let go of our loved one’s hand, because we do not know if it is safe to continue holding the person we love close.

I pay particular thanks to the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen), for her powerful speech. She is doing incredible work to support LGBT+ rights, and she shared a powerful contribution from her constituent that it was very important to put on the record. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Tim Roca) not only for his powerful words, but for giving Hansard a real job with his foreign language skills.

There are those who say that we do not need Pride any more—that we have achieved equality; that discrimination and hate based on sexuality and gender is no longer tolerated in this country—but there are also those who say that Pride is not suitable for children with “impressionable minds”, that gay men are “poofs” who mince about, and that if LGBT people “want acceptance”, they need to

“stop making a big song and dance about it”.

Homophobic comments like these will sadly be familiar to many in this Chamber and across the country. To my mind, such intolerant views are profoundly un-British; they are also the words of Reform’s candidate in the Makerfield by-election. I do not think there could be a clearer demonstration of why we still need Pride, and why we still need today’s debate, than that.

I am proud to say that my constituency of Bracknell hosts its own Pride, which will celebrate its fourth year this July. Growing up as a young gay boy in Berkshire—my hon. Friend the Minister grew up in Berkshire herself— I never thought I would see a time when not only Reading, but smaller towns across our county, had a Pride. Wokingham, Windsor, Newbury and other towns all now celebrate Pride every year. This is important, because Pride should be celebrated in every community so that every person can feel that they are loved and included, wherever they come from and whoever they are. I remember how, growing up gay, I sometimes felt like I would never belong. That could be an incredibly isolating feeling. Even in the 2000s, it was very scary for me to come out, knowing that not everyone would accept me for who I was. I take this opportunity to thank everyone who has worked so hard to bring Bracknell Forest Pride to where it is today, and I look forward to celebrating with them later this summer. I want every young LGBT+ person growing up in Bracknell Forest not to have to feel the fear I experienced growing up.

In her opening speech, the Minister rightly recognised that the progress made on LGBT+ rights has been hard won, and that the battle for a society where LGBT+ people can truly live without fear of hate and discrimination is far from over. Through the Crime and Policing Act 2026, this Government have acted to equalise hate crime law, so that victims of homophobic hate crimes can know that perpetrators will be fully held to account. We are bringing LGBT+ veterans the justice they deserve after the suffering they have endured, and we are issuing nearly half a million pounds-worth of specialist funding for LGBT+ domestic violence services, as well as committing £21 million over the next three years to support the LGBT community internationally in this time of increasing hostility towards our community nationally and globally. We must now go one step further by delivering on our manifesto commitment to a fully trans-inclusive ban on conversion therapy, as we have committed to doing in the King’s Speech.

Those measures are welcome and important, but I cannot in good conscience say that the path of progress in this country is straightforward, even now and even under this Government. I will briefly touch on the draft EHRC code of practice laid before Parliament, which many Members across the House have mentioned. I recognise and respect the judgment of the Supreme Court. It is a narrow and specific judgment about a specific aspect of the Equality Act, but I do not think that in order to make the world safer for women, we must make it less safe for trans people. I have real concerns that where the new EHRC guidance was supposed to bring clarity, it has instead brought only more anxiety, fear and confusion. The Government can and must find a way forward that balances the rights of women and of trans people. If we fail to do that, we risk the safety of both groups, and risk entrenching ourselves in a divisive culture war that we can and must move beyond.

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

I sit alongside the hon. Member on the Joint Committee on Human Rights, and he does phenomenal work there, including on the code of practice and the issues that he is outlining. Does he agree that it is worrying that whenever anyone in this House or outside this place tries to defend trans people, we see transphobia slip into homophobia and other languages of hate? The same tropes are being used against other people, in hopes of shutting them up. Does he share my concerns about the chilling effect that has on our democracy and the rights of LGBT people in the UK?

[Peter Swallow]

The hon. Member makes a profoundly important point. We have all seen the conversation around preserving the rights of everyone in our society—women and trans people—increasingly made into a political football and into something deeply personal. A lot of that is being driven by social media. Every Member who chooses to speak in today’s debate will have weighed up whether the comments they are making will be clipped and pushed out on social media, and whether they will receive abuse because of what they have chosen to say in this place. That is profoundly wrong. While I recognise that feelings from those on both sides of this issue often go well beyond the pale, it is incumbent on all of us in this place, whatever our views on this delicate and important issue, to treat the debate with the respect and dignity that those affected by it deserve. That is fundamentally where we need to get to on this important issue.

The hon. Member kindly highlights my role on the Joint Committee on Human Rights, on which I sit alongside him. That reminds me that the Gender Recognition Act 2004, which has been rightly championed in today’s debate, was passed in large part because of a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights that confirmed that trans people have the right not to be outed under article 8. A lot of us have spoken today about how important it is that we feel able to be our authentic selves and to come out. It is incumbent on us all to create a society where LGBT+ people feel that they can live their authentic lives and be honest about who they are. I also think that we all have a profound right to keep personal matters private, if that is what we choose. One of my concerns—it has been raised by many Members today—is that the draft code of practice undermines that human right to privacy, which is set out in law.

This is a really challenging debate to be part of. At times, it has been overwhelming, because I am so proud of my party’s record on LGBT+ rights and because, if I am being honest with myself, I think that reputation is at risk. We are at risk of losing our reputation as the party of equality, and our very soul as the Labour party, if we are not willing to stand up for the rights of everyone, including the LGBT+ community.

I want to finish on a slightly happier note by wishing everyone in Bracknell Forest and beyond a very happy Pride Month. This is a time to remember, to celebrate hard-won rights and freedoms, and to look forward with a renewed sense of community and hope for the future—for everyone in our great country: all members of the diverse communities that call it home, including, today in particular, all members of the LGBT+ community.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mims Davies]

I am going to make the exact point that the hon. Lady raises in my later remarks, so I wholeheartedly agree with her. My colleagues have succeeded on merit, but, to the hon. Lady’s point, they were asked to step forward, be part of things and stand. They did not rely on their identity; it was talent, dedication and leadership. That is in everybody, however we identify.

As has been said many times in this debate, who someone loves should not affect their success. There should be no barrier to someone’s success and ambition, and who someone loves should not be the measure of what their ambition or success can be. Pride is there for everyone to be represented equally and for us not to be divided. Safe, fair and equal is true equality for all of us.

I am concerned that in some quarters, as has been raised today, Pride is not being used to unite; instead, it is being used to inflame tensions. It is important that we recognise that. Let us be honest: we saw this, in a way, with Monday’s statement, when we heard speaker after speaker saying that the EHRC code of practice is exclusionary and anti-trans. We have heard some of that today. I fundamentally do not believe that, although I acknowledge that some people have said that today and that they do believe it. That is, of course, the reality of this place. I reiterate that I believe that that characterisation is not correct. The Equality Act remains clear in its protections, including those related to gender reassignment. The code reinforces rather than diminishes those protections. It is important, as I think we all agree, that the code works and that it does not diminish wide-ranging, hard-fought rights. Of course, it reflects on other areas, such as age and disability.

It is striking that in the debate earlier this week we did not roundly acknowledge the importance of lesbianism, which the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) has just referred to, and the fact that the code needs to work for same-sex groups, particularly lesbian organisations. I have spoken about this before. These groups have often found themselves at the sharp end of an increasingly fraught debate about the relationship between biological sex, gender identity and sexual orientation. There have been credible reports of lesbian groups being deplatformed, pressured or silenced simply for asserting their same-sex attraction. That is the reality for some women. The fact that in 2024—just a couple of years ago—a representative of the LGB Alliance was required to offer a legal definition of the term “lesbian” in court is still, frankly, extraordinary.

The situation reflects a wider confusion that risks eroding hard-won protections. We should be wary— I think we have all said that in the Chamber this afternoon—of repeating past mistakes of marginalising and dismissing same-sex attraction in particular. As we heard from my right hon. Friend the Member for Daventry, lesbian women played a vital role during the AIDS crisis in supporting gay men during some of the most difficult chapters of our history. That solidarity should never be forgotten, and neither should it be replaced with division.

I know that some Members in the House are supporting the measures in early-day motion 240. I believe they are doing so because they have not necessarily fully appreciated the implications for women’s rights, particularly for lesbians who rely on the clarity of law to maintain their safe single-sex spaces. I welcome the thoughtful speech made by the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Tim Roca), in which he covered his views and approach to that. I think that does accord. It is clear from what has been discussed around the code of practice that it is vital that healthcare for all matters. That is absolutely something we need to look at.

On flags, I personally think we need less tribalism and more grown-up and pragmatic conversations. We can and must protect women’s rights, respect trans rights and find workable solutions. I do not think we should be arguing about flags. We can stand up for people, communities and, crucially, harmony. The Conservatives do that through the LGBT+ Conservatives. I am going to invite the hon. Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) out on the best night ever—once again, a Conservative willing to let him come out on the best night ever.

The Conservative party roundly believes that everyone should be treated equally before the law, regardless of their race, sex or sexual orientation.

[Peter Swallow]

The hon. Lady just said that we should not be arguing about flags, and I totally agree with her. In my view, it should be up to councils and community groups to decide the version of the pride flag that they choose to fly, whether it be the traditional pride flag or the progress pride flag. I do not think that that is arguing about flags; it is giving people choice. Is the hon. Lady comfortable with the Leader of the Opposition ordering Conservatives up and down the country not to support the flying of the progress pride flag, and does she not think that taking away that choice is, in fact, creating the argument?

[Mims Davies]

I am wearing my Conservative pride badge, so I am quite happy to wear a flag, as are many in our party. As I say, the Conservative party roundly believes in treating everyone equally before the law, regardless of race, sex or sexual orientation.

The original rainbow flag is a widely recognised symbol. I am wearing it today to show respect and support for gay people. My personal view is that the traditional rainbow flag already rightly brings us together and has a sense of unity. Its purpose should be to bring us together, not to divide us. The progress pride flag, by contrast, can be seen by some as a symbol of identity politics, somewhat atomising society into different and divisive identities. Therefore, I am comfortable with our position in not being behind it in the way that the hon. Member described, but I fully respect his opinion, and I fully respect that other people feel differently.

Children: Development of Essential Skills

Peter Swallow Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered Government support for children developing essential skills.

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I start by declaring that I am chair of the all-party parliamentary groups for schools, learning and assessment; on social mobility; and for classics. It is wonderful to see so many young people in the Public Gallery.

We are facing a generational moment. We know the risks that technology and artificial intelligence increasingly pose to our world, but we also know the opportunities. It strikes me that it is up to us to shape a generation that responds to these challenges not with despondency, but with the confidence and authority to make these tools work for humanity, not against it. Without the human skills to properly engage with, discuss and question the world around us, we are setting our children up for failure.

[Claire Hazelgrove (Filton and Bradley Stoke) (Lab)]

As the former vice-chair of the APPG on financial education for young people, I really welcome the Government’s work on that issue, including the commitment to introduce it more firmly in the national curriculum for all ages. Does my hon. Friend agree that it would be helpful were the Minister, in her summing up, to provide us with an update on the work to get that ready for young people in the years to come?

[Peter Swallow]

Absolutely. I thank my hon. Friend for making that point. I am aware that the financial strategy sits with the Treasury but, like many of the tasks that face this Government, there must be a cross-Department approach. It is really important that all Departments grapple with the need to deliver better skills for our young people, and I am sure that the Minister has heard my hon. Friend’s request.

Today, when it has never been easier for young people—I should add that it is not just young people—to be misled by mis- and disinformation, and to be sucked in by algorithms and harmful content on social media that comforts them with easy answers in a complex world, essential skills have never been more crucial. I am thinking of skills such as being able to think critically, communicate and reason; having the confidence in ourselves to form opinions; and, above all, having the resilience and will to engage with the world in all its complexities, rather than turn away from it.

[Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)]

I have been contacted in the past week by pupils from Collingwood college in Surrey Heath—it is very close to Bracknell, but I can still claim it. They have been talking to me about mis- and disinformation, and they have said how important it is to receive citizenship education, which is excellently delivered at Collingwood. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that citizenship is one of the core, critical skills that gives children exactly the kind of awareness of mis- and disinformation that is vital as we approach the mid-21st century?

--- Later in debate ---

[Peter Swallow]

I absolutely agree with my constituency neighbour, and I will come on to talk a lot more about citizenship, which is vital. Just this week, I have been dealing with my local Reform party using AI to create fake images of our community, which is exactly the kind of fake news being put on social media by bad faith actors that we need to ensure that all people—particularly young people—are equipped to face.

Schools have a fundamental role to play in preparing young people for life. Both the recent curriculum and assessment review and the schools White Paper recognise the importance of skills and enrichment as part of a holistic education in and outside the classroom.

[Alex Easton (North Down) (Ind)]

Does the hon. Member agree that fostering strong partnerships with educational institutions can play a pivotal role in developing a curriculum that aligns with current labour market requirements? Additionally, I emphasise the importance of collaboration with tech companies to enhance digital skills education.

[Peter Swallow]

The hon. Member’s point is well taken. I will talk about the interim report from the Milburn review later, but it is really clear that the skills system that we inherited from the previous Government has not set up our young people for the world of work. Essential skills are about more than just preparing young people for the world of work—they are also about preparing young people for the world of life—but such preparation has an important role to play. I am keen that we work proactively with tech companies to create such opportunities, where doing so in the best interests of young people. Social media companies in particular need to do a lot more to protect young people from harm online. The one thing being true does not detract from the other thing also being true.

Returning to the curriculum and assessment review, I welcome the fact that the Government have accepted the recommendation that citizenship be made a statutory requirement for key stages 1 and 2, and that the secondary citizenship curriculum will encompass topics that are vital to raise engaged citizens, including government, law and democracy, climate education, and financial and media literacy. Hon. Members have already made those points.

Given the Government’s plans to lower the voting age to 16, those topics have never been more important. The Government are right to recognise that young people are an important voice in our society, but if we are to extend the franchise, we must make sure that we get it right and grasp the opportunity to use the classroom to its full potential, so that young people feel empowered and confident about using their vote. As the chair of the APPG on schools, I have heard from young people and educators both in England and across the devolved nations, where 16 and 17-year-olds already have the vote in some elections, as part of our ongoing inquiry into votes at 16.

It was clear from those sessions that young people do not feel as empowered as they should feel by our current democratic education, but that is perhaps not surprising given that many teachers have also reported a lack of confidence in the guidance on how to facilitate conversations about democracy and politics in the classroom. It is right that teachers do not tell young people what to think, but it is deeply concerning that many are so afraid that they might be seen to be doing so that they do not feel comfortable enough to broach the subject of current affairs at all.

As a former teacher, I know that the classroom can and should be a place where ideas and questions are explored openly, not feared or hidden from. I ask the Minister to bear that in mind as the Government continue their important work to reform the curriculum, because the best curriculum in the world will not be a success without teachers who feel properly equipped to deliver it.

Another theme that stood out strongly from our evidence sessions is the importance of essential skills being integrated into the curriculum, rather than being just the preserve of citizenship or personal, social, health and economic education. I was delighted that the schools White Paper explicitly recognises the relationship between skills such as media and financial literacy and critical thinking, and the wider school curriculum, including core subjects like English and science.

It was notable from our sessions that there is a widespread perception that democratic education is often tokenistic, relegating it to a niche, subject-specific interest, rather than making it a fundamental priority of our education system; indeed, I think that is true of all essential skills. The embedding of democratic education throughout the curriculum and connecting it to broader work on employability is an important rejoinder to that perception.

On that point, I was also pleased to see the Government recognise in the schools White Paper that oracy is vital not only to education but to employability and the Government’s growth mission, as well as more widely to the confidence and mental health of young people. As we now seek to implement the changes set out in the White Paper, it is important that we do not tokenise oracy and other essential skills but recognise that they represent more of an approach to teaching and learning. In the case of oracy, it is focused on learning through talk and learning to talk.

Over the last week, we have heard from Alan Milburn on the essential skills that young people are missing as they leave education and seek to enter the workplace. Embedding oracy into the curriculum and into school-wide teaching can be a significant driver of the very skills that our young people are missing, including increased confidence and communication skills, greater critical thinking ability, and a greater capacity for listening to and empathising with others. I emphasise that all those skills will never be taken by robots.

As oracy organisations like Voice 21 highlight, oracy is an explicitly inclusive practice. Oracy-rich teaching supports early identification of children with speech, language and communication needs; it removes barriers that are highest for students with special educational needs and disability, and for those from disadvantaged backgrounds; and it helps to nurture the learning environment that the Government have been clear is their ambition to create, where high standards and inclusion are one and the same.

I recognise that we are moving in the right direction, and I thank the Minister for the important steps that she is already taking towards a more holistic approach to education. I also thank her for visiting my constituency last year to discuss the work that we are doing to reform the SEND system and ensure that education is inclusive of everyone. I also thank Voice 21 for the work that it is doing to support schools in my constituency, including at St Joseph’s primary, where, as I heard on a recent visit, oracy is empowering the students to feel more confident and boosting their communication skills.

A fully holistic approach to essential skills means not only integrating them into what is taught in the classroom but the wider school and enrichment experience. Both inside and outside the classroom, enrichment opportunities are fundamental to the development of skills like resilience, collaboration and confidence. Just in the last recess, I saw an excellent example of how students volunteering in the community can build essential skills and a spirit of citizenship, through the fantastic MindGreen initiative at Bracknell and Wokingham college.

When we have these conversations, we often speak about schools, but it is vital that the same principles are not forgotten in our further education colleges so that all young people are given the opportunity to develop the skills to succeed. With that in mind, I warmly welcome the Government’s commitment to an enrichment entitlement for every young person alongside a national framework and benchmark for schools. Some organisations, however, like the Duke of Edinburgh’s award, have raised concerns that enrichment often gets lost in the wider school curriculum and becomes too thin or inconsistent to make a difference.

Research has shown that that is especially likely to be true in state schools compared with private schools, with the Sutton Trust finding that one in five teachers in state schools do not think their school provides good opportunities for pupils to develop these non-academic skills, compared with just one in 10 teachers in private schools. Needless to say, no Labour Government would be satisfied with allowing that gap to continue, so I ask for the Minister’s assurance that the Government are committed to making sure that such opportunities exist meaningfully for all young people in all schools, regardless of background or location.

[Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)]

On the hon. Member’s point about involving all schools, does he agree that the problem is not so much about ensuring that young people who are interested and want to get on develop their skills? Disaffected and disinterested young people are the ones we really have to reach out to, to ensure that they, too, avail themselves of the benefits that he rightly outlines.

[Peter Swallow]

The hon. Member makes a valuable point. To again reflect on the interim report by Alan Milburn, he highlights that one of the challenges we face is not just that the current education system does not do enough to develop skills; it is also not doing enough to develop a love of learning and inclusion. Young people feeling disaffected, and that they do not belong in schools or colleges, means that we are also unable to make sure that they are accessing a great education. I have always said that the best education is a fun education, because when young people enjoy getting involved in school—enrichment can be a huge part of that for many young people—they are more likely to feel that they belong and to succeed.

Over the recess, I was reminded of the importance of enrichment opportunities in young people’s lives at a visit to the Bracknell Cobras, a basketball club in my constituency that works with more than 500 young people a week. During my visit, I heard that the Cobras do not just teach young people to play basketball; they also develop essential skills like teamwork and resilience. They even train them up as referees so that they can gain a nationally recognised qualification.

That last point brings me to the crux of my argument: even when young people have the opportunity to develop skills, both in the classroom and through enrichment more widely, they often feel unable to properly identify or quantify their learning, or that the skills can be meaningfully demonstrated to future employers or education providers. That is why, as the Minister knows, I have been working with a wide group of stakeholders to gather views and build the case for reform of the skills passport, inspired by the invaluable work of Skills Builder, which has built a brilliant framework to quantify the skills that young people need to thrive.

That idea was first raised with me by young people themselves. On a visit to Garth Hill college in Bracknell, a group of GCSE citizenship students delivered a fantastic presentation to me asking why the school’s curriculum was not better at teaching them essential life skills, such as financial literacy, and why those skills were not measured. Their question, which has stayed with me, was this: why is there no Duke of Edinburgh’s award for life skills?

It is obvious to anyone with experience in education that what is not measured is not recognised. I fear that we are failing young people and employers by neglecting to ensure that the essential skills young people develop both in and outside the classroom are properly and meaningfully recorded. As part of its research into the future of the labour market, the National Foundation for Educational Research found that it was essential skills such as collaboration, communication, problem solving and information literacy that will be most needed by employers by 2035. We are already facing deficits in those areas, which are likely to only get worse.

It has never been more vital that we equip young people to not just develop essential skills, but record and demonstrate them. That area has strong potential to support the Government’s wider work with regard to growth and supporting young people back into the workforce. I was very pleased to see a commitment to exploring skills passports in the post-16 White Paper, and the recent launch of the UK standard skills classification, which is an important step forwards in a common understanding and vocabulary around skills. I am also grateful to Skills England for meeting with me to discuss that very point.

However, it is clear to me that for any form of skills passport to be truly meaningful, introducing it at the end of the school journey is too late. If young people are to be properly empowered to recognise, develop and communicate their essential skills in a way that speaks to them and to potential employers, we must help them to identify those skills much earlier.

I want to touch briefly on the new careers service for schools and colleges planned by the Government. I have referred to Alan Milburn’s important interim report numerous times, but another point we have heard over the last few days is the importance of the early years of someone’s career and the long-term impact of missing out on opportunities at that stage. I therefore ask the Minister for assurance that a recognition of the importance of essential skills will be built into the new careers service, so that young people are given the best and most holistic advice possible at this vital point in their educational and personal development.

Essential skills are essential for so many reasons. They help us to become more employable and educated, but, more than that, they help to make us better, more resilient, confident and well-rounded people with more capacity for empathy and more curiosity about our world. At a time when we are facing so much uncertainty and volatility, it is incumbent on all of us to equip our young people with the skills they need to be active and empowered citizens in the world.

The evidence is clear: our most essential skills are our human skills. Building an education system that no longer overlooks or sidelines but nurtures them is vital. It is up to the Government to build on the great work already started in a truly holistic way so that young people are supported to develop the skills that we as a country need from them, not only as future workers, but as citizens. That is how we break down the barriers to opportunity for every child.

[Dr Rosena Allin-Khan (in the Chair)]

I remind Members that they should bob if they wish to be called in the debate.

--- Later in debate ---

[Ian Sollom (St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under you in the Chair, Dr Allin-Khan. I congratulate the hon. Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) on securing this really important debate.

Whether children leave school with the skills that they need is not just an education question but an economic one, and one that the Government have a particular responsibility to get right. As mentioned, the Milburn review, “Young People and Work”, published just last week, underlines how complex and deep-rooted the problems are and how much depends on getting the foundations right. Skills England has noted that members of the UK workforce are more likely to be underqualified for their occupations than counterparts in other OECD countries. We are talking about 26% of UK workers, against an OECD average of 18%. That is not an accident; it is the accumulated consequences of choices made about what we teach, how we teach it and whom we invest in earliest.

If we want to understand where things go wrong, we should start at the beginning, as the hon. Members for Bolton North East (Kirith Entwistle), for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon) and for Strangford (Jim Shannon) and others have highlighted. The early years foundation stage data for 2024-25 shows that 68% of children achieved a good level of development at the end of reception, meaning that nearly one in three did not, falling short on personal, social and emotional development, physical development, communication, literacy or numeracy. Children who arrive behind tend to stay behind. The attainment gap between disadvantaged pupils and their peers opens early and rarely closes, sadly.

[Peter Swallow]

The hon. Member is making a really important point about the need to focus on early years. Given that, does he regret the decision taken by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Government in 2010 to cut Sure Start?

[Ian Sollom]

The point is well made about the importance of early years. That decision was sadly before my time, but it has certainly had consequences that we should all attempt to put right.

Investment in high-quality early years provision, properly funded and staffed, is the most cost-effective skills intervention available for the long term. The Liberal Democrats broadly welcome the curriculum review, but we are concerned about the scrapping of the EBacc, at least in isolation—that is to say, without more clarity about accountability. The EBacc fulfilled an important role in mainstreaming subjects that were in decline, such as the humanities and languages. The right response to that is to build on its success by broadening it further to encompass arts, coding and physical education, rather than removing the accountability framework altogether. Without clear guidance, vital subjects risk being sidelined as schools struggle with budget pressures. That is why the Government’s commitment to give arts GCSEs equal status to humanities and introduce a core enrichment entitlement matters. It is also why the test now is whether those commitments translate into actual curriculum time in actual schools—particularly those serving disadvantaged communities, where the squeeze has been sharpest.

It is important to recognise that breadth is only part of the answer; the quality and relevance of the core curriculum matters just as much. Too many young people leave school without feeling equipped to use maths in their lives or careers. Financial literacy, data interpretation and proportional reasoning are not optional extras but critical foundations. We should be asking not just whether children can pass their maths exam but whether the maths they are taught actually serves them.

That same question—does what we teach serve children in the world they are entering?—applies in many respects. The hon. Member for Bracknell and others highlighted civic skills, and I would pick up artificial intelligence, given the world we are entering. The curriculum review is the right moment to embed AI literacy, not simply as a bolt-on qualification but as a genuine thread running throughout what children learn. Understanding those tools and their capabilities and limits is becoming a basic competency. The Government’s instinct is right, and we encourage real ambition in following it through.

Skills alone are not enough if children cannot see where they might take them. Even a child who leaves school with strong skills, broad knowledge and digital fluency may still struggle if nobody has helped them to see what is possible, so careers guidance really matters. It matters most for the children who do not have family networks reaching into professional life. For children in that position, a well-timed conversation about what their aptitudes could lead to is not peripheral support; it is transformative. The Liberal Democrats are clear that the earlier that guidance begins, the more powerful it is.

To pick up the points made by my hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance), children with SEND must be included in every part of our ambition for essential skills. Too many children with SEND still cannot access support for their education, health and care plans. The system remains slow and adversarial, and is too dependent on families fighting for entitlements that should be automatic. Early identification and intervention is not happening at the scale or pace required, and when that does not happen, the consequences are compounded through adolescence and into adulthood.

The Government’s reforms are a step in the right direction, and we genuinely welcome their intent, but SEND reforms must be judged not by the stated intentions but by the outcomes for children. That is the standard we will continue to hold the Government to.

--- Later in debate ---

[Peter Swallow]

I thank Members for taking part in today’s debate. It has been fantastic to hear support from across the House for improving access to skills for our young people. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel) for reminding us that skills can be delivered across the curriculum. Classics is an excellent example, as it can teach young people not just about declensions, but democracy; not just Augustus, but oracy. Other subjects are available.

The hon. Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) is a doughty champion for young people, particularly those with SEND. He made many excellent points about some of the barriers faced by young people. My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton North East (Kirith Entwistle) was right to highlight early years. I am grateful for the work being done in Bracknell Forest to roll out new services through our Government-backed Best Start family hub.

The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) brought, as always, a thoughtful insight from the Northern Irish perspective. He was right to highlight the need for screen time guidance, which I know the Government are committed to delivering. I was delighted to hear my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon) raise the issue of reading. As a member of the Education Committee, I have been working on its inquiry into reading for pleasure. The evidence we have heard was echoed in my hon. Friend’s contribution.

I respectfully disagree with the hon. Member for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire (Ian Sollom) on the EBacc. As the Minister has heard me say many times before, it did not support all humanities subjects equally. Citizenship GCSE, for example, was not included. I do, however, welcome his comments about early years and careers guidance.

I thank the hon. Member for Meriden and Solihull East (Saqib Bhatti) for his contribution, but I will quote to him from Alan Milburn’s interim report, which says

“the school system is built on young people gaining qualifications which is not the same as ensuring they are ready for work.”

I encourage the hon. Member to read Milburn’s interim report thoroughly.

Finally, I thank the Minister for all the work she is doing in this space. I am excited to see the enrichment framework when it comes forward. I will scrutinise it closely, as she would expect, but I welcome her commitment to delivering it inclusively. As we have all agreed today, getting this right is crucial to supporting our young people’s futures. We all want to see opportunities for young people in our constituencies, and that is what has inspired each of us to speak today. I thank you, Dr Allin-Khan, and all Members for their contributions.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered Government support for children developing essential skills.

Oral Answers to Questions

Peter Swallow Excerpts

Monday 20th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Bridget Phillipson]

I recognise what the hon. Gentleman has said, because I have spoken to so many parents, families and children across the country who have been badly let down by a system that has not put children’s needs first. We are determined to change that through the once-in-a-generation SEND reforms that we are setting out. I am glad to hear that he held an event in his constituency, and I encourage all Members to make sure that parents, educators and others share their views as part of our consultation.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

T8. As the MP for Sandhurst, I am proud to represent many armed forces families. As the Minister will know, armed forces families often move around, but no particular support seems to be given to their children. There is no marker to identify these children, they do not qualify for fair access protocols, and they are given no particular priority in admissions. Will she meet me to discuss how we can better support the children of armed forces families?

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

We are deeply grateful for the service of our armed forces families. I would welcome the opportunity to meet my hon. Friend, and I recently met members of the all-party parliamentary group on the armed forces. We will be bringing forward further admissions reforms shortly.

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Peter Swallow Excerpts

Wednesday 15th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Olivia Bailey]

I echo my hon. Friend’s congratulations to other campaigners, including Become. On her point about data collection, my the Under-Secretary of State for Education, my hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister), who is sitting next to me, is happy to meet her to discuss the issue further.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

As well as being a member of the Education Committee, which has done sterling work on this point, I am a member of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, which is undertaking an inquiry on human rights in the care system. We held a powerful roundtable with care-experienced young people, and that point was powerfully made to us. We have not yet reached the end of our inquiry and do not yet have recommendations, but I want to put on record my gratitude to those young people for sharing their experiences, and to the Government for making this really important change; I know that it will make so many lives better.

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank my hon. Friend for his important work, both on the Education Committee and for his constituents. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State will meet the Chair of the Committee soon, and we commit to working with it.

Let me turn to Government amendment 105B, on allergies in schools. I thank everybody who has worked so hard campaigning on this issue. They include my hon. Friend the Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore), the hon. Member for Rutland and Stamford (Alicia Kearns), and other Members from both Houses. I particularly thank the fantastic Helen Blythe, the Benedict Blythe Foundation, and the wide range of allergy safety charities that have engaged with the Government on this matter.

As I promised when the Bill was last before this House, we have introduced a Government amendment to place allergy safety on a statutory footing for all schools. It requires all schools to have allergy safety policies, to review them regularly, and to publicise and publish them. Schools must have regard to the statutory guidance, which we have co-produced with expert stakeholders. Through regulations, we will put in place duties covering the content of allergy safety policies, stocking adrenalin devices, securing allergy awareness training, and incident reporting. Benedict’s law, named in memory of Helen Blythe’s son Benedict, is intended to ensure that every child with allergies can attend school safely.

Let me turn to Lords amendments 38 and 106, which relate to social media and phones in schools. Protecting children online is a priority for this Government, and the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology have made it clear that it is a matter of how, not if, the Government will act to deliver further protections for children and young people.

Whereas the amendment proposed in the House of Lords is narrow, our consultation will allow us to address a much wider range of services and features. It will also allow us to consider different views on the way forward. It is crucial that we do not pre-empt the Government’s consultation, which will close next month.

SEND Provision and Reform

Peter Swallow Excerpts

Monday 13th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Gregory Stafford]

Given the time available, I will probably not take too many more interventions. On the hon. Gentleman’s point, it is a strange argument that, because a child has been legally given an EHCP that requires a certain level of support but, for whatever reason—whether through the school, perhaps, or the local authority—that cannot be provided, we should therefore water down their legal rights.

When the current system works—and it does work in places—it is transformational. One parent in my constituency wrote:

“We are incredibly relieved. I have received the final copy of the EHCP, and the school is now implementing it. It has been a long road.”

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[Gregory Stafford]

No, I will not.

That parent’s relief exists because there is a system that ultimately guarantees support. Replacing that certainty with ambiguity is not reform; it is regression.

The second test is whether the proposals improve delivery on the ground. The model set out in the White Paper relies heavily on early intervention through the NHS and local schools, but that depends on capacity that currently simply does not exist. For example, in the Hampshire and Isle of Wight integrated care board, CAMHS—child and adolescent mental health services—waiting times stand at about 28.5 weeks for an assessment, rising to 52 weeks for treatment, far beyond the NHS standard of 18 weeks. Without clinical capacity, the central delivery mechanism of these reforms cannot function as intended.

Schools are already being asked to fill that gap. In discussions with headteachers and special educational needs and disabilities co-ordinators across my constituency, including at South Farnham school, Highfield South Farnham, St Polycarp’s, St Mary’s, and Badshot Lea infants, a consistent picture emerges: rising demand, limited special support and growing pressure on staff to manage needs that should sit elsewhere in the system. One school put it plainly:

“CAMHS sometimes ask us to manage pupils ourselves because they do not have the capacity.”

That is not joined-up delivery; it is displacement of responsibility.

The consequences of this gap between the policy and the reality are severe. In my constituency, a 12-year-old whose needs were identified in year 2 is still awaiting an assessment. Without diagnosis, her school has been unable to put the right support in place. Her mother wrote:

“We are at our wits’ end. The delays are not just administrative—they are shaping the course of our daughter’s life.”

That is not an isolated example. I have also worked with a family who, despite clear professional evidence, were initially refusing an EHCP and forced into a lengthy tribunal process, only for the decision to be overturned.

There are further consequences of these proposals that need to be addressed. By moving away from a clearly defined, legally enforceable EHCP framework towards individual support plans, much of the responsibility for decision making—and, inevitably, dispute resolution—risks being pushed on to schools. That would place teachers and school leaders in an increasingly difficult position: they would be expected to determine provision, manage expectations and resolve disagreements with families without the protection of a clear statutory framework or the capacity to meet those needs. At a time when schools are under significant pressure, this risks shifting both the legal and emotional burden on to institutions that are simply not equipped to carry it.

--- Later in debate ---

[Ben Coleman]

My hon. Friend makes an excellent point, and I am glad his local area has received that investment. Indeed, the two boroughs in my constituency of Chelsea and Fulham will get a 10% increase in SEND funding for next year to support new, dedicated SEND spaces in every secondary school. That sort of thing is happening across the country, and it is absolutely right that it should.

These are real commitments, seriously made: nearly £4 billion for school improvements, new therapists and specialists, and better teacher training; the new individual support plans for every child with SEND; and the EHCP and tribunal rights being retained for those with the most complex needs. All are seriously made commitments, and I welcome them, but I have to say that questions none the less remain—some of them have been raised today. I have just three questions for the Minister, and the first relates to enforceability. If a school fails to deliver what is written in a child’s individual support plan, I do think parents need a clear legal route to resolution.

[Peter Swallow]

I recently hosted an open meeting with parents on these reforms. Although there was widespread welcoming of much of what is in the White Paper, they urged that real, sustained change should happen. One concern was about the enforceability and accountability for ISPs, what would happen if a school was not delivering what was needed to support a child, and where that accountability would fall.

[Ben Coleman]

My hon. Friend makes a very good point. There has been talk about a beefed-up school complaints process. I do not think that will be sufficient, and I ask the Minister to consider extending the remit of the local government and social care ombudsman to provide a binding route—a statutory backstop—to resolution when schools and other settings fall short.

My second question is about health and social care co-ordination. This is where the White Paper is perhaps most silent, and where the current system is most visibly broken. As has been mentioned, the Health and Social Care Committee, of which I am a member, recently examined how the health aspects of EHCPs are being delivered, and the result was depressing. One of the biggest problems is that integrated care boards and local authorities simply do not jointly commission children’s therapy services. Back in 2014, a truly joined-up education, health and care plan was exactly the ambition that was being strived towards, but Health never fully showed up and the then Government allowed it to get away with that for years. We now have to tackle that, and witnesses to our Committee urged that the Government mandate local authorities to have representation on ICB decision-making boards. Is the Minister prepared to give that serious consideration?

Finally, children with SEND spend most of their lives outside the classroom, cared for by parents, who receive remarkably little support. Will the Minister commit to a clear, published expectation that health and social care will provide families with the information, guidance and practical support that they need?

The White Paper shows that the Government understand that the system is broken and are prepared to invest. Success is going to depend on many things, including whether Health finally shows up, whether ISPs are properly enforced and whether families get the support that they need. I have every confidence that this Government are going to carry on doing the right thing, and I look forward to improving the lives of disabled children and young people, and their families.

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Peter Swallow Excerpts

Monday 9th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Laura Trott]

As ever, my right hon. Friend is the voice of reason in this Chamber.

Turning to our amendment that deals with pupil admission numbers, Lords amendment 102, I hope the Government will try to explain why they think good and outstanding schools should be made smaller when they are oversubscribed. To be clear, that is exactly what the Government are asking Back Benchers to vote for this evening. Parental choice has been the great driver of school improvement in this country—it empowers parents to vote with their feet and encourages excellent schools—yet the Government want to turn that principle on its head. They want to cut good school places, which is bad for parents, bad for schools and, above all, bad for children. School standards are on the Order Paper this evening, and the Government want to vote against them.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

The right hon. Lady knows that the challenge at the moment is that, because of the way that the system works, local authorities can control the number of admissions to good and outstanding maintained schools, but have much less control when it comes to academies. When there are falling pupil numbers—as she knows there are across the country—and work needs to be done to ensure we have the right number of places in the right areas, the only lever that our local authorities have to pull is reducing admissions to good and outstanding maintained schools. Does the right hon. Lady not agree that it is right that this Government act to make sure we can make choices in the interests of children and parents, regardless of the type of school?

[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.

World Book Day

Peter Swallow Excerpts

Thursday 5th March 2026 Westminster Hall

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. I declare an interest as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for schools, learning and assessment, and the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on social mobility. This debate was opened so passionately by my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), Chair of the Education Committee, who rightly reminds us of the role of parents in World Book Day, scurrying around and supporting their young people to dress up in fantastic costumes. One of my happiest memories of World Book Day is of when I was a teacher and put together a fantastic costume of the Cyclops from Homer’s “Odyssey”—I do not think the pictures are still online, so do not try to look for them.

Reading is one of life’s joys. It is a bridge to new worlds, to new opportunities and to new ideas. One of my proudest and happiest moments so far as Bracknell’s MP was having the honour to open a new school library at Fox Hill primary in my constituency. Seeing the excitement from so many young readers who could not wait to make use of the new renovated space warmed my heart. So too did visiting Uplands school in Sandhurst alongside the Education Secretary last year, and speaking to students there about the books they were reading and why they had chosen them.

I take this opportunity to officially wish everyone here, in Bracknell Forest and across the country a happy World Book Day, and a happy National Year of Reading. The Government are marking the event with a commitment to ensure that every primary school in England has a library by the end of this Parliament.

Reading has proven benefits for attainment. It has been linked to stronger writing skills, improved brain development and even higher future earnings, but it is not just academically that it benefits young people. It also has a demonstrable impact on wellbeing, including on confidence, empathy and emotional intelligence. Given the challenges facing young people in our modern world, these are the skills we need to help them develop.

As the Chair of the Education Committee said, we are conducting an inquiry into reading for pleasure. We have heard evidence about the wide range of benefits of reading for young people, and that reading for pleasure—reading what we want to read, because we want to read it—has particular advantages. We have also heard alarming evidence that there has been a 36% decrease in the number of children between eight and 18 who are reading for pleasure since 2005. Only a third of children are now picking up a book and enjoying doing so. We are seeing that decline in two particular groups—those with special educational needs and boys.

There are obvious barriers to reading for many SEND learners, particularly those with dyslexia, but that does not mean that they should not be afforded the same opportunities as their classmates to access the benefits and joys of books, or that they do not stand to benefit from reading just as much as their peers. There are many ways to access the world of reading, from traditional physical books to audiobooks, graphic novels, newspapers and e-readers, and it is not just format where inclusion matters. What international evidence exists suggests that the systemic use of age-appropriate, culturally inclusive children’s literature, coupled with an engaging reading experience, can help build positive reading habits and enhance comprehension for SEND learners. For that reason, it is so important that we support and empower schools to create inclusive cultures around reading.

The British Dyslexia Association, a fantastic organisation that just so happens to be based in my constituency, has stressed that there are concrete measures that schools can take and Government can promote that would make a real difference. Those include funding widely stocked and accessible school libraries, providing training and technology to support staff, and early intervention to identify reading difficulties as soon as possible.

According to the National Literacy Trust, reading rates are lower for boys than for girls at every age, and fewer than one in 10 boys aged 14 to 16 read for daily pleasure. That is an important point. Reading is important for attainment but, as I have said, it is already a joy, and it should be encouraged not purely for academic purposes but simply for fun. It is especially interesting that the NTL’s research shows that reading for pleasure dips for both girls and boys in early adolescence, but recovers for girls while remaining persistently low for boys. That drives the widening gender gap on reading for pleasure in the teenage years, so why do young men not pick up books again while their female classmates do? We do not have all the answers to that, but we need to find them.

[Liam Conlon (Beckenham and Penge) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend mentions that reading is so important for children’s development and enjoyment. None of that is possible without the work of incredible children’s authors. Beckenham and Penge was home to Enid Blyton, with over 700 books including the Famous Five series, and Walter de la Mare, with his incredible series of children’s ghost stories. Today, we are home to some fantastic children’s authors, including Penny Chrimes and Peter Bently. Will my hon. Friend join me in thanking every children’s author, past and present, for their incredible contributions?

[Peter Swallow]

Absolutely. As we heard, the range of children’s books is growing. It can be slightly reductive to suggest that a single type of book appeals to a single kind of child, so we need to see a broad range of books. We need non-fiction as well as fiction, because lots of young people love to get into reading by picking up a non-fiction book. Whatever we can do, with the help of children’s authors, to encourage young people to find the thing that gets them reading and gets them hooked so that they carry on reading, including a broader range of works, is important.

This is a world where boys and young men are facing unique pressures. They are increasingly vulnerable to turning away from the world and towards the misogyny and hatred they too often encounter online. Hon. Members in the Chamber may have heard me speak many times about the importance of skills in our education system, but it strikes me that this debate concerns the most essential skill of all, which goes to the heart of how we equip our boys to become healthy and happy young men in today’s world—not reading per se, as important as that is, but empathy. Ultimately, whatever the genre or type of book, reading is about seeing the world from a new perspective and a point of view that is different from our own. That is why it speaks to our common humanity.

As we come together as a nation this year to celebrate our shared love of reading and our mutual responsibility to foster that in the younger generation, we must ensure that that effort is inclusive and inspiring. That is perhaps the biggest challenge, but it also holds the greatest rewards. If we can take reading for pleasure as our starting point, not our ending point, everything else will follow.

I will finish by sharing the book that I am reading at the moment, which is “Drive Your Plow Over the Bones of the Dead” by Olga Tokarczuk. I am reading it with my book club. I thought I would finish with that, purely to point out that no one is ever too old or too young to pick up a good book.

--- Later in debate ---

[Caroline Voaden]

Communal groups where children can read together and parents can be encouraged can really boost a parent’s confidence in their ability to share a book with their child, because some parents to do not feel as confident reading as others do.

Last Friday night, I had the pleasure of reading “The Gruffalo” to my 18-month-old grandson. It was the first time that I have sat and read him a bedtime story, so I am starting again that long journey of reading to children, which ended with my eldest daughter after the fifth “Harry Potter” book, at which point I said, “No more,” and that she would have to read the last two on her own.

[Peter Swallow]

The hon. Lady provokes me to add a huge thank you to all the grandparents, kinship carers and extended family who support parents in reading to their children. In my family, it is often my dad who reads to my nieces and who they run to for a book at bedtime, so I say a huge thank you to the surrounding family who support our young people to love reading.

[Caroline Voaden]

The hon. Member is absolutely right. When I was a rather frazzled single parent of two young children, I remember that my mum would sit calmly and quietly with the girls and read them stories when I did not have the headspace. It was a lovely thing to see, and they developed a very special bond.

This week, we on the Education Committee have heard some powerful evidence from experts on reading. Reading to children exposes them to millions of words that differ substantially from everyday spoken language, as books contain a wider range of vocabulary, more complex sentence structures and richer narrative forms. Reading helps children to develop their own vocabulary that they can go on to use during their school years and beyond. Dr Jo Taylor, associate professor of language and cognition at University College London, explained to us how exposure to language leads to vocabulary development.

There is also clear evidence that reading improves cognitive development, tuning an area of the brain that specialises in word processing. Several studies show that, alongside those developmental benefits, young people who develop the habit of reading in early childhood are likely to achieve higher qualifications and better upward social mobility later in life. An evidence review by BookTrust found that shared reading is consistently associated with stronger academic performance. By age 16, reading for pleasure is a much stronger predictor of progress in vocabulary, mathematics and spelling than parental educational attainment. Compared with their peers, disadvantaged children who achieve highly at the end of primary school are twice as likely to have been read to at home in their early years. Reading is such an important thing to do with young children.

That evidence shows how vital it is for improving social mobility that we strongly encourage and educate parents to read to their children regularly, throughout the early years, and that we continue to push children to keep reading for pleasure throughout their childhood and into their adult lives. No opportunity is better than World Book Day to demonstrate to children the simple joy of reading. World Book Day is a wonderful reminder of the difference that reading can make in a child’s life, not just in the classroom but far beyond it. I commend the hon. Member for Glasgow West (Patricia Ferguson) for her competition. I love the fact that she knows someone called Liam the librarian—he sounds like a character from a children’s book.

Dressing up as a favourite book character is great fun for children. It is a fantastic way for them to bring their fantasies to life and to live, if only for a moment, the life of their favourite character. It is perhaps less enjoyed by the frazzled parents, and I think that World Book Day has the potential to become a bit of a competition about who has the best fancy dress costume, so I welcome the alternative approaches taken by some schools to avoid that, and welcome costume lending libraries. I clearly remember the horror of, the day before World Book Day, remembering that a costume was needed.

I am very proud to say that my younger daughter is now a professional costume maker in film, trained at a very early age by her disappointment in her mother’s attempts. She would begin deliberating about her World Book Day costume weeks before the event. Although I am biased, I have to say that her costume of Effie Trinket, from “The Hunger Games”, was quite phenomenal. So, for all those parents who did not manage it this year there could be an upside.

Beyond the fancy dress, it is important that we remember what World Book Day is really about: reading. That is especially so this year, the National Year of Reading. The current state of children’s reading in this country is deeply concerning. We heard a lot of evidence about that in today’s debate. Reading rates are plummeting: the National Literacy Trust’s annual literacy survey found that in 2025 the percentage of children and young people who said that they enjoy reading was at its lowest level in 20 years. Just under a third of children aged eight to 18 said that they enjoyed reading in their free time last year—that is a shocking decrease of 36% over the last 20 years—and less than a fifth of eight to 18-year-olds said that they read something daily in their free time last year.

As hon. Members have discussed, there is a noticeable gendered aspect to the decline in the love for reading. Some 39.8% of girls aged eight to 18 said that they enjoy reading, compared with just a quarter of boys. That gap has expanded massively in recent years. It is also important to note that in 2020, research by the National Literacy Trust found that children and young people from minority ethnic groups, particularly those from black ethnic backgrounds, reported that they did not see themselves in what they read. It is far harder for children from such groups to find pleasure in reading when they struggle to find a book that they can relate to, or feel a cultural connection with. This week in the Education Committee we heard that that might have as much to do with the marketing of books, and with the industry, as with anything else.

How do we address the concerning trend of reading rates that continue to fall? As we have heard, libraries are a good place to start. The importance of a child having the opportunity to choose any book they like and take it home for free cannot be overestimated, especially for those who cannot afford to buy new books. Access to books is a key issue for disadvantaged children. The National Literacy Trust’s research found that one in 10 children and young people reported having no books of their own at home, rising to one in six for those who receive free school meals. That is why the Liberal Democrats would fund additional library opening hours as part of our commitment to hobby hubs—community third spaces where people can gather and enjoy hobbies, including reading. We would encourage children to utilise these spaces, providing access and opportunity for them to read more.

It is a sad fact that Libraries Unlimited in Devon has just had to declare that it can no longer sustain the opening hours of our much-loved libraries as they are, due to the chronic and sustained underfunding of local authorities like Devon county council over the past decade or so. I am pleased that my Liberal Democrat colleagues in Devon have just committed an extra £1 million to help libraries transition to a more sustainable footing, although that will have to rely on volunteers as well as paid staff—and it should not have to be that way.

I am really encouraged by the extraordinary response to my colleagues’ consultation, showing just how important libraries are to the people of Devon, who are clearly readers. We have an astounding array of bookshops in my constituency, and I commend everyone in the East Gate Bookshop, Castle Books, Oxfam Bookshop, the Harbour Bookshop, Another Chapter, Browser Books and Dartmouth Community Bookshop—I hope I have not forgotten any.

Additionally, like public libraries, libraries in schools need proper resourcing, and school librarians need training to encourage children to find books that will light a spark for them. Reading for pleasure means that children need to find something that they genuinely enjoy reading, so on this World Book Day I welcome the Government’s ambition to have a library in every primary school by the end of the Parliament. I hope the Minister can set out how the Government will invest specifically in school libraries, including all those that already exist, to ensure that children have access to books and support with fostering a love for reading, especially children with SEND, who may find reading more of a challenge but can still enjoy it.

When trying to explain the recent decline in reading rates, we cannot ignore the recent increase in recreational screen use. Children are being engrossed by addictive algorithms, swiping through TikTok rather than investing time and attention in a book. That is why the Government’s campaign to increase the number of children reading for pleasure must be accompanied by stronger measures to crack down on addictive social media platforms and children using phones in schools. That should start with legislating to introduce film-style age ratings for social media platforms that use addictive algorithms, as proposed by the Liberal Democrats, and legislating to ban smartphones from all school premises.

Oral Answers to Questions

Peter Swallow Excerpts

Monday 19th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Georgia Gould]

We recognise that the size of deficits that councils are accruing while the statutory override is in place might not be manageable with local resources alone. We will be setting out more information in the local government settlement this year.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Minister for visiting my constituency last year, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education for visiting last week, when she came to see an expanded school nursery at Uplands primary in Sandhurst. She took the opportunity to speak to some fantastic hard-working teachers, and to hear their concerns about the level of SEND need and the need for more support. I welcome the announcement of £200 million extra funding for SEND training, which will be vital for teachers who need that extra support.

[Georgia Gould]

I was delighted to visit my hon. Friend’s constituency and to see some brilliant work, including a new SEND resource base that means children who would otherwise have to travel for miles are instead being educated in their community. As my hon. Friend sets out, I heard from teachers who wanted to put in more support but did not always have the tools to allow them to do so. I am delighted that we are able to invest in teacher training, which will support teachers in his constituency and across the country.

Support for Dyslexic Pupils

Peter Swallow Excerpts

Tuesday 11th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Butler. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) for securing this important debate. He has raised the topic consistently and I know it is personally very important to him, as well as to the hon. Member for Broxtowe (Juliet Campbell).

As we have heard, dyslexia is a common, lifelong difference in how a person processes language that affects reading, writing and spelling, but not intelligence. In fact, many people with dyslexia excel at creative thinking, problem solving and seeing patterns that others miss. As we have heard, it is estimated that up to one in 10 people in the UK are dyslexic—this is not a rare condition—yet too often the system treats those strengths as an afterthought.

Families wait months, sometimes years, for an assessment; in the meantime, children are told to try harder, when what they need are simple, evidence-based adjustments. Teachers do their absolute best, but without the training and resources to confidently support different styles of learning, provision can become a postcode lottery, and school budgets that are already stretched leave little room for specialist staff, assistive tools and the protected time that inclusion requires.

For many, diagnosis comes too late. If a child is not diagnosed early, they can find they are already years behind other students when it comes to reading and writing. Early identification and practical support can change the trajectory of a child’s education and their life beyond school.

What should we do? First, we must put early identification at the heart of special educational need interventions. That means streamlining NHS processes so that families are not stuck before support need is recognised. It means investing to reduce waiting lists—constituents of mine in Frome and East Somerset struggle to get timely diagnoses. Crucially, it also means empowering schools to implement reasonable adjustments at the first signs of need, without forcing children to wait for a piece of paper before help arrives.

Secondly, we need to equip teachers and schools to include every child, every day. That starts with initial teacher training and continuous professional development that is practical, hands-on and focused on what works for dyslexia in real classrooms. It continues with a national inclusion framework, so that every school has a clear, evidence-based blueprint for inclusive practice. It includes a national parental participation strategy, recognising that families are experts in their children and must be partners from the start, not last-minute consultees.

We must also strengthen the role of the SENDCO. They should sit on senior leadership teams and have protected time to do their work. They are the bridge between strategy and practice, and they cannot do their job effectively if they spread impossibly thin. We should reform Ofsted so that inspections look seriously at inclusive provision, not just exam results. Inclusion is not a footnote: it is the mark of a great school that every learner is seen, supported and stretched.

Thirdly, we should normalise simple adjustments and assistive technology. This is not about lowering standards; it is about measuring understanding, not just handwriting speed. Coloured overlays or paper, clear fonts, chunked instructions, alternatives to copying from the board, text-to-speech and speech-to-text tools—that is incredibly difficult to say—help students to access the curriculum and express what they know.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

I used to be a teacher, and I know from my own practice that many of the measures that were originally introduced to support students with special educational needs, including dyslexia, actually support all children to learn better in the classroom. Does the hon. Lady agree that we need much more focus on inclusive teaching practice, because that will support everyone in the classroom, including, most importantly, those with additional needs?

[Anna Sabine]

As a parent of children who are not dyslexic but had other ways of learning, which were well supported in schools, and as someone who recognised later in life that I had different ways of learning and would have benefited from different and inclusive practices, I totally agree. It would have helped me to say the words “text to speech” as well. As the hon. Member said, adjustments can benefit many learners, not just those with a diagnosis.

We can use artificial intelligence to help us to create text that those with dyslexia can use. A constituent of mine from Peasedown St John told me last week that she has an older child with dyslexia, who was diagnosed later in childhood and is now suffering from a lack of age-appropriate resources. He enjoys “The Legend of Zelda” computer games, so my constituent asked AI to write a story based on that for a person of his age with dyslexia with his characteristics. She said it was the first time he has been able to read something he is really interested and engaged in. AI can be a tool to allow a whole new group of people to access something they never normally would.

We must make sure there is a fair deal for families. Too many parents feel that they must fight the system to secure basic support. A parental participation strategy should set out clear points of contact, transparent timelines, and co-produced plans that follow the child through school and into further education or apprenticeships. Families should not need to be experts in bureaucracy just to get their child the help that they need.

To achieve the changes that I have set out, we need to work cross-party—I am pleased to hear the cross-party consensus today—and with families, educators and employers. The result would be a system that sees every child, supports every learner, and opens the door to a lifetime of contribution and success.

Oral Answers to Questions

Peter Swallow Excerpts

Monday 20th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Georgia Gould]

The Government have put £1 billion into the high-needs block to support children with special educational needs, but I want to hear from Members from around the country about their ideas for reforms, and I am happy to meet the hon. Member and colleagues.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

T7. Let me first declare that I chair the all-party parliamentary group for schools, learning and assessment and the APPG on social mobility. Businesses, schools and young people in Bracknell Forest all tell me that essential skills such as financial, digital and media literacy, creative problem-solving, communication and collaboration are more important than ever, but are not formally recognised or measured. How can we help young people to succeed by developing and recognising those essential skills?

[Georgia Gould]

I look forward to working with the APPG. We agree that we need to equip young people with key knowledge and skills to adapt to a rapidly changing world, and the curriculum and assessment review will say more about the wider curriculum.