Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund

Rachael Maskell Excerpts

Tuesday 1st April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Janet Daby]

I thank the hon. Member for her points. I very much appreciate the concern caused by the delay in this announcement, and I recognise the potential impact on children and families, as well as local authorities, regional adoption agencies and providers of therapy. Under the Adoption and Children Act 2002, there is a statutory duty for local authorities to have support services in place for adopted children. The Government very much support that. To her questions about kinship carers, the plan is for the support fund to open to kinship carers as well, and that £50 million is for the year. Further information will be provided shortly about those arrangements.

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

I clearly welcome today’s announcement, but it is a tragedy that many services have closed and people’s therapy has been stopped as a result of this funding hiatus. Will the Minister ensure that those impacted by the gap in funding will have additional support for the trauma that it could have caused to those young people? Will she ensure that the Treasury signs off funding ahead of deadlines when the funding ends?

[Janet Daby]

The Government remain committed to adopted children and children who are in kinship placements or have special guardianships. The Government will continue to work together to make sure that sufficient funding is in place and is more timely.

Draft Higher Education (Fee Limits and Fee Limit Condition) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2025

Rachael Maskell Excerpts

Monday 24th February 2025 General Committees

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

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms Furniss. I speak as an MP with two universities in my constituency. Over the last few years, I have often talked with them about the new financial strains they have experienced. I have therefore followed this debate extremely closely.

Many universities have had a very difficult few years. We need to acknowledge that and congratulate them on the way they have put measures in place to control those costs, but for many it has been at a cost to their courses, with many staff, including academics, being made redundant. That means narrowing the offer at a time when we want our higher education sector to excel, as it is a sector of which we can be immensely proud.

I fully understand why the Government have gone down the path of raising tuition fees by 3.1% to a cap of £9,535, other adjustments aside. However, it would not be right to see this as a long-term solution, and I therefore seek an assurance from the Minister that we will not see further fee increases in this Parliament, and that we will instead look to address the quick succession of financial shocks to which the sector has been exposed.

The student visa changes have had a profound impact on York’s universities, decreasing the number of overseas students. The universities are therefore having to reschedule their costs. I very much hope the Minister will move to enable students to come with their dependents to study in the UK and put into our local economies, which depend on those students and their families making a wider, positive contribution, as well as helping the universities with their finances. I also hope the Minister will ensure that we can continue to have the excellence that comes with the academic study and research base that I see in York’s universities.

I know that universities are trying to plan for the long term. I disagree with what the shadow Minister says about universities overreaching, as the University of York and York St John University have placed themselves in the centre of our city, ensuring that they are part of our economic future. Investing in the technologies and jobs of the future is part of York’s inclusion agenda, which we need to facilitate. Universities are key anchor institutions in places like York, and they can help to address the inequality and huge regional divides we experience.

But we also know that there have been wider pressures. The national insurance obligations have had a real impact on the sector, as has the rise in the national minimum wage. I urge the Government to feed back to the Treasury in particular that the national insurance rises could have been more nuanced so as to assist the sector, particularly given the plans to raise student fees. I welcome the rise in the national living wage, but that of course has had a cumulative impact on universities’ income and expenditure.

As we all know, Brexit has had a real impact on universities. The loss of the Erasmus scheme has not been equalled by the Turing scheme, and there has been an impact on research relationships, academic work and the ability of students to come to the UK—the visa controls. It has also not been long since the covid shock and then the cost of living shock. That has all had a cumulative impact on the budgets of universities, which are trying very much to lead our communities and drive forward the economy of the future.

Despite universities’ excellence in demanding more from their finances, restricting their ability to offset costs has meant that the Minister has had to let those costs fall on students. I have real concerns about that, not least after discussing the issue with students in York. I understand the need for more income for universities, but the impact on students is considerable. Having met student unions in York, I know that the cost of housing there is absolutely astronomical and having a real impact on students. It is the same with travel costs, which are significantly more than in other places outside London.

As a result, students are having to work ever more hours in the local economy to offset the costs. They are being priced out of degrees; many who have started their studies in York have not been able to complete them as they are having to work more or less full time. Academic work is suffering as a result. I have a real concern that placing a greater financial burden on students particularly affects those from families with a lower socioeconomic background, and I note that page 27 of the relevant equality impact assessment says that the fee increase may deter students of lower socioeconomic status from coming to university and discusses the real cost of the increase on them.

I trust that the Minister will look at how to support hardship resourcing through the Office for Students so that no student is turned away. All in all, the tuition fee model is broken when it comes to funding education; the money risks ending up in the wrong places. Now that we are in power, I urge the Government to take a bigger view of funding for higher education. Education should be seen as the most significant investment in our economy. It fuels our research and innovation, drives economic benefit and transforms people’s lives. We need to make sure that no one is excluded. I regret that the failures of the last Administration have brought us to the point of raising fees today. I trust that we can find better solutions for tackling the wider funding of higher education and its broader ecosystem, not least as universities produce the research and innovation to drive our whole economy forward.

In closing, I ask the Minister whether he expects other rises in student fees during this Parliament. What steps are the Government taking to ensure that people of lower socioeconomic status are not impacted by this policy? I note the increase in the money that students will be able to access and what the Minister has said about the amount that students pay back. What future planning are he and his colleagues doing to ensure that there is a better account and better process for funding higher education in future?

[Stephen Morgan]

I thank the shadow Minister and my hon. Friend the Member for York Central for their contributions. First, I reiterate the importance of the statutory instrument in putting our higher education sector on a secure footing and ensuring that students receive value from their investment. Committee members will know the sector’s importance for economic growth. They will know about its world-leading research and contribution to local communities, as well as how it changes the lives of those who participate in it.

Providers have suffered a significant real-terms decline in their income, following seven years of frozen tuition fees, and we need to act now to ensure that future generations of students can benefit from our world-class higher education sector. However, we are clear that in universities, as across our public services, investment can come only with the promise of major reform. That was why my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education announced in the House on 4 November last year that we will publish a plan for higher education reform in the summer.

The shadow Minister made a number of points about national insurance contributions. As the Chancellor set out in the Budget, raising the revenue needed to fund public services and restore economic stability requires difficult decisions on tax. That is why the Government are asking employers to contribute more. We strongly believe that that is the fairest choice to help to fund the NHS and wider national priorities. The higher education finance and funding system needs to work for students, taxpayers and providers. The fee increase represents a significant additional investment from students into the sector, and we will support higher education providers in managing the financial challenges that they are facing.

On student loan repayments, we understand that some students might worry about the impact that the increased fee limits will have on the size of their loan. We want to reassure students that, when they start repaying their loan, they will not see higher monthly repayments as a result of changes to fee and maintenance loans. That is because student loans are not like consumer loans; monthly repayments depend on earnings, not simply the amount borrowed or interest rates. At the end of any loan term, any remaining loan balance, including interest that has built up, will be cancelled.

The shadow Minister asked about graduate earnings. On average, graduates benefit from their university education by over £100,000 in their lifetime compared with someone who did not go through higher education. He also asked about the press coverage of the University of Greater Manchester. Of course, that is a matter for the university, but we understand that the Office for Students—the independent regulator for HE in England—has been notified of this case. The university is conducting its own investigation and it would not be appropriate to comment any further at this stage.

My hon. Friend the Member for York Central, who is a real champion of higher education for her constituents and her community, made helpful points about quality. Students and the taxpayer have a right to expect a good-quality education in return for their considerable investment in higher education. For their investment, students deserve excellent teaching that supports them to learn and develop the skills that they need to achieve their full potential. That was why we made a commitment to raise university teaching standards in our manifesto, and we want higher education providers to collaborate, share best practice and deliver continuous improvement in the quality of their provision. Students also deserve to know what to expect when making their investment in higher education. We want providers to be transparent about the things that matter to students, such as the number of contact hours that they can expect when studying specific courses.

On international higher education students, the Education Secretary, in her speech in July 2024, made it clear that we welcome international students who have a positive impact on UK higher education, and on our economy and society as a whole. International students enrich our university campuses, forge lifelong friendships with domestic students and become global ambassadors for the UK. Our universities have taught dozens of current and recent world leaders. This gives us an enormous amount of soft power and also builds strong relationships, which is why we offer international students who successfully complete their studies the opportunity to work, or look for work, in the UK on a graduate visa for two or three years after their studies finish, allowing them to live and work here, and to contribute to our society and economy.

[Rachael Maskell]

I am grateful for what the Minister says, but we know that the changes in visa requirements have had a major impact on higher education. I urge him to take that back to the Department and look at the changes again so that our universities can welcome students and their dependents into our country.

[Stephen Morgan]

My hon. Friend is being kind to me, as she knows I am not the Government spokesperson on higher education, but I will ensure that my colleague who does lead on it takes that point back to the Department.

My hon. Friend the Member for York Central made a number of helpful points about access and participation. Our mission is to break down the link between background and success that has hampered the life chances of too many in this country. We are committed to supporting the aspiration of every person who meets the requirements and wants to go to university. We know that there are stubborn and persistent inequalities within our education system, and those must be addressed. It is vital that all higher education providers play a stronger role in expanding access and improving outcomes for disadvantaged students.

By summer, we will set out our plan for higher education reform and the part that we expect providers to play in that. Through our reform, we are determined to ensure that universities are engines of opportunity, fairness and growth. I commend the regulations to the Committee.

Question put and agreed to.

School Accountability and Intervention

Rachael Maskell Excerpts

Monday 3rd February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Catherine McKinnell]

Following the end of headline judgments in September, Ofsted undertook the big listen, and listened very carefully to feedback on the way it conducts inspections while also reviewing the format for reporting on those inspections. I note the hon. Lady’s comments in that regard. In the new system that has been designed, that work has paved the way for the roll-out of school report cards. Subject to consultations—both the Government and Ofsted are very open to the views of the profession—they will be rolled out in September.

Alongside a reformed Ofsted, we are creating the RISE teams, comprised of leaders with a proven track record of improving school standards. Those teams will draw on bespoke improvement plans for stuck schools, with significant investment. The previous Government made £6,000 available for stuck schools; under this Government, it will be more like £100,000 per school to drive that improvement.

The hon. Lady’s comments in relation to SEND are well made. As I said to the Chair of the Select Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), that is something that Ofsted will be judging, looking specifically at inclusion as well as—not instead of—high and rising attainment standards in schools. The reformed accountability and improvement systems very much build on the work of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which will: require teachers to have, or work towards, qualified teacher status; ensure that all schools teach a cutting-edge national curriculum, following the curriculum and assessment review; and restore teaching as an attractive profession through a floor, but no ceiling, for pay and conditions.

All those reforms combined will drive high and rising standards and break down the barriers to opportunity for every child.

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

I appreciate all the work that my hon. Friend is doing, but the governance structures of multi-academy trusts lack transparency, not least to the local community. In some areas, their executive boards are choosing members and trustees, without the rigour of accountability. Will my hon. Friend ensure that mechanisms are available to allow far more robust scrutiny of multi-academy trusts, as well as the option to return those schools to the local authority?

[Catherine McKinnell]

As part of its proposed reforms, Ofsted will be looking at the leadership of schools, including their governance, because good leadership is clearly the route map to children’s success within them. We are legislating for all schools to have a duty to co-operate with local authorities on place planning and admissions to ensure we have a whole schools system that works together. We encourage collaboration by outstanding, excellent, exemplary schools—trusts in particular—that can share their expertise across the board: a collaborative schools system that serves the community and, where possible, ensures that every child has access to a good local school within their community.

Oral Answers to Questions

Rachael Maskell Excerpts

Monday 27th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Bridget Phillipson]

There is no reason that schools should need to make any kind of change. Of course, headteachers make practical decisions about how they feel they should run their schools. We are cutting the cost to parents and putting more money back in their pockets, unlike the Conservative party, which seems to oppose practical, straightforward measures to cut the cost of school uniform.

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

Ensuring sensory and motor integration is crucial for a child’s development and learning, yet many services that do so are available only in the private sector. Will the Minister meet me to discuss how we can ensure that parents can access those crucial services?

[Catherine McKinnell]

I know that my hon. Friend is a strong advocate for children with special educational needs and disabilities in her constituency, and I am happy to meet her to discuss the issue.

Oral Answers to Questions

Rachael Maskell Excerpts

Monday 9th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Bridget Phillipson]

We want all schools to do well for our children and to drive high and rising standards regardless of the name above the door.

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

Academisation has created fragmentation in lines of accountability, leaving local authorities carrying much risk, not least when it comes to SEND provision. Will my hon. Friend look at academy governance structures to ensure that local authorities can carry that responsibility and be able to deliver for children with SEN?

Primary School Breakfast Clubs

Rachael Maskell Excerpts

Monday 18th November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Mr Dhesi]

My hon. Friend speaks with a great deal of experience. I am sure the Minister and his team will take the contributions made by hon. Members on board because they are setting out how we will make a positive impact on the lives of those in our communities. That is what we were elected to do, drawing on our various diverse experiences, backgrounds and perspectives.

Breakfast clubs provide further potential benefits. As my hon. Friends have highlighted, a proper sit-down breakfast, among peers, not only allows children to access healthy food, but encourages the building of interpersonal relationships and the progression of social skills—key aspects of a child’s development that are often overlooked in an educational setting. Will the Minister assure me that universal breakfast clubs will not only provide a healthy meal for young children, but also facilitate and encourage development of vital social skills?

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

My hon. Friend is making a fantastic speech. York Hungry Minds is currently carrying out a pilot project examining what happens when schools have breakfast clubs and universal free school meals. Does he agree that we need to look at the outcome of that evidence to determine whether some children also require a free school meal in the middle of the day, as well as at the start of the day, to ensure that there is equity in the outcomes we are seeking?

[Mr Dhesi]

My hon. Friend speaks with a great deal of experience. I have seen over the last seven or eight years in the House that she has done a great deal of work to counter poverty and some of the worst problems that our society faces. Everything should be evidence based. It is important that the Government build on that to help our communities further.

Oral Answers to Questions

Rachael Maskell Excerpts

Monday 4th November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Catherine McKinnell]

As my hon. Friend mentions, high-needs funding will increase by almost £1 billion in 2025-26, compared with 2024-25, bringing total high-needs funding to £11.9 billion. That funding will help local authorities and schools with the increasing cost of supporting children and young people with SEND. We will continue to support local authorities to meet those demands and reform our system, so we can create inclusive education for every child.

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

I want to raise the issue of governance. There are too many minds controlling the system, which ultimately stymies local authorities’ ability to reform services in order to embed a culture of nurturing and to ensure that the best interests of children are represented. While reviewing the SEND system, will the Minister take a look at governance, and ensure that is there is one controlling mind, and it is that of the local authority?

SEND Provision

Rachael Maskell Excerpts

Thursday 5th September 2024 Westminster Hall

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

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Betts. What a mess—young people broken by a broken system. The Children and Families Act promised so much, but without people, money and the rest of the system to back it up, it could never deliver. When the wait for the diagnosis is over, the battle for the EHCP is won and masses of resources have been spent, the demand is still not being met. Staff do their very best, but still people are falling out of the system.

I have spent the past year digging deep, looking at the local, the national and the international to bring best practice to this space. I have looked at the environment, the community and the child. On the environment, I say to the Minister, “Go back to the Department and rip up the behaviourist approach to education. It creates a world where neurodiverse children—those with anxiety or mental illness—and even the timid cannot survive.”

Instead, we should adopt a therapeutic, nurturing approach so that all children can thrive. In York, where schools have done so, all gain from recognising the need for every child to be safe, valued and included. It is a happy place where a child will strive for excellence and the whole child will be able to navigate their way through this world, rather than an obstacle course of micro-traumas, stress and anxiety. Let us not build bigger and bigger schools, but create more therapeutic and intimate spaces that belong to the children and where they can thrive. We should bring children out of home schooling, out of their bedrooms, off the streets and back into the classroom. School must be safe for all those children.

We also need to recognise, as the Government do, the failed nature of the curriculum. Let us build space for our brains and our bodies. Are we really shocked that young people are failing when only half of them is engaged? We have cut out arts, music, sports, nature, dance, play, exploration, wonder and fun. Yet all children, especially those with SEND, benefit from that balance.

When I visited Sweden, I went into schools to hear about what they were doing. They brought people into the heart of the school, not prescribing from an EHCP but taking a whole-child and a whole-school approach, using the skills of psychologists, teachers, occupational therapists, physios and speech therapists for all children. Let us recognise that school community and ensure that we value its members. Our teaching assistants do so much of the work, yet their pay is so poor—that must be addressed.

[Anna Dixon]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

[Rachael Maskell]

I am going to continue.

As for parents, I have seen them pushed away and gaslit, when they should instead be integrated into the heart of the school, as they are in Sweden, leading on what their child needs. When it comes to the children themselves, let us review the purpose of education: preparing children for the world today, not breaking and testing them. Children with SEND struggle in that environment just to satisfy the need for data for Governments and to meet different goals. We need every child to flourish, and that is why we need to think again.

Free School Meals

Rachael Maskell Excerpts

Tuesday 7th May 2024 Westminster Hall

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

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Betts.

We have heard how 900,000 children from low-income families are not in receipt of free school meals and about the adequacy of what many children are receiving, not least if they take a packed lunch—they are not being nutritiously fed throughout the day. In fact, only 1% of packed lunches reach nutritional standards. In York, that is very much the case. We have about 4,000 children who are entitled to be in receipt of free school meals, but only about 3,000—about 75%—actually receiving them, because we do not have auto-enrolment. I urge the Government to join up the data so that we see eligibility following through to receipt of free school meals. It can be done, it must be done, and it will ensure that those families are well served.

I want to talk in particular about York Hungry Minds. York has the lowest-funded upper-tier local authority in the country, yet, as a Right to Food city, it prioritised feeding hungry children when Labour came to power in the council last May. City of York Council put the first £100,000 into Two Ridings Community Foundation as a vehicle for sourcing and independently funding the programme. It then called for city partners, including in industry and business, as well as individuals from the community, to boost that fund.

The pilot that York is engaged in is based in two schools: Westfield, where there are already far better healthy lunch choices for the children at key stage 2; and Burton Green, which is investing in breakfast for children. The results are already incredible. Starting in January this year, the research piece by the University of York will follow the pilot through to the end of the year. Researchers are already seeing an improvement in attendance—an issue that the Government are wrestling with at the moment—and far better engagement in learning. These are the early seeds of what it means to have a full stomach and to be able to work in such an environment.

I really do congratulate those involved in the project, but we need to ensure that the funding continues and is available for roll-out across our city. That is certainly the ambition of the Labour council, but we need the support of Government. I am delighted that Labour is so committed to ensuring that children start the day with a full stomach. We know the difference that will make for them.

This is not just about what happens for a child in school; it is about resetting the life course inequality that we see across our society. We want to address that by ensuring that children are well fed. That inequality results in differentiations in exam results, in where children move on to, and ultimately in the career choices that they can make and in their incomes. If we are to break intergenerational inequality, that small measure of having high-value, highly nutritious meals at the start of the day—and, I trust, rolling into the middle of the day too—is so important. That can be the game changer that families need.

However, we need to evaluate as we go, and that is why I congratulate the University of York on its investment in not only the project that I described but in looking at child hunger. It is evaluating the difference that the project will make to the lives of those children by looking at how much healthy food is going to them as a result of the menu choices; by looking at the amount of food waste, which is another important factor; and by looking at any changes in readiness to learn, in absence due to ill health or in school attendance. Looking at the data, which I trust the Minister will do, will strengthen the opportunity to roll out these programmes.

It is also important that the programme looks at the stigma around the provision of free school meals. We must remember that no child wants to be differentiated because of the income level or socioeconomic disadvantage their family experiences.

[Mrs Hodgson]

One of the reasons that John Vincent and Henry Dimbleby, who authored the school food plan, said that they included recommendation 17 on universal free primary school meals is that, when they looked at the evidence, the children who improved the most when all the boats rose were those who were already entitled to free school meals. The only thing that had been removed was the stigma. Does my hon. Friend agree that that is very important?

[Rachael Maskell]

My hon. Friend knows so much about this subject and could not make a more powerful point. We need all young people who have hungry stomachs to be able to engage, and taking away the stigma not only gives those children confidence but ensures that the issue of hunger is addressed.

I would like to quickly reinforce some of the points that colleagues have made. It is important that we make sure that thresholds rise and are appropriate, and it is important that people can enrol in the holiday activities fund if their eligibility changes over the holiday period, rather than having to wait until the beginning of the new year. It is possible to do that, and I trust that the Minister will.

Oral Answers to Questions

Rachael Maskell Excerpts

Monday 29th April 2024 Commons Chamber

[Tom Hunt (Ipswich) (Con)]

3. What recent assessment her Department has made of the adequacy of SEND provision.

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

11. What assessment she has made of the adequacy of SEND provision.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (David Johnston)]

Having undertaken a review of the special educational needs system, we published our improvement plan last year. Provision is regularly reviewed through school and local area inspections by Ofsted and the Care Quality Commission. We also collect and review data on education, health and care plans, including on timeliness and volumes, and on capacity in special schools, SEND units and resourced provision.

[David Johnston]

My hon. Friend is a great champion of children with SEN and he is absolutely right. Labour’s ideological obsession with private schools means that it will even charge children in an independent special school 20% VAT for their needs. That will make it harder for those families to afford the provision they need and drive up demand for places in state special schools. It is just another example of the mess Labour would make of our education system.

[Rachael Maskell]

The inequality in the funding formula is driving inequality for children with SEN. In York, we are seeing not only the lack of placements that are needed, but staff being laid off because of an inadequacy of funding. We know that the number of children with SEND is growing exponentially in York, so will the Minister not only review the funding formula to ensure that it is fair, but give local authorities the power and provision to provide for the future needs of our city?

[David Johnston]

York is in our safety valve programme to provide support with the financial challenges it has. It has seen a 27% increase in per-head funding in the last three financial years. We review the funding formula every year. The biggest complaint people have is the historic factor, which is difficult to reduce quickly because there are children receiving that provision at the moment.