Antisemitism: University Campuses

Steve Yemm Excerpts

Tuesday 30th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds South West and Morley (Mark Sewards) for introducing this important debate.

I am fortunate to have had a positive relationship with the small but perfectly formed Jewish community in Northamptonshire for many years. The Northampton Hebrew congregation is a welcoming, open and very hard-working group. Through the work of Michael Necus and the trustees, Jewish students at the University of Northampton have a safe place to pray, to be part of our community and to connect with others.

Although antisemitic hate and crime is very low in my county and at my university, the experiences of those at my nearest JSoc at the University of Warwick have been very different. The stories I hear bring home how challenging it can be to be Jewish and attend a UK university and that we must continue to take every step possible to make sure our universities are safe for all students, no matter their religion. Through these stories, I have also heard how universities such as the University of Warwick and the University of Northampton are working hard to create inclusive spaces for all students.

In my contribution to this valuable debate, I will focus on the role of universities, because what we are seeing on campuses is not just down to bad actors but to how universities respond. At Warwick, there have been some clear examples of best practice. In the days after the 7 October attacks, several individuals infiltrated the freshers WhatsApp group of Warwick Jewish society and sent a stream of abusive antisemitic messages. At a time when members of the society were trying to get to know each other at a social gathering, they watched this unfold on their phones in real time. It was frightening. Jacob Lederman, the society’s treasurer, told the BBC and other media outlets that, alongside the immediate impact on students, it has put long-term safety and security pressures on the society that other societies at the university simply do not have to face.

The positive is that the incident did not slow the society down. It is still running weekly events with security in attendance, and the society praised the campus security team, saying that it could not be more grateful for the support it was given. Thankfully, the police were able to find the individuals responsible, who were not students. They were arrested and rightly prosecuted. That is an example of the kind of incident that universities have to deal with, and it shows the importance of a serious response, working with the police, acting decisively and treating the issue with the gravity it deserves.

Unfortunately, that is not the only experience of antisemitism that Warwick students have faced. In the summer of 2020, four members of the University of Warwick Conservative association were filmed singing and dancing to a Nazi propaganda song. That is completely unacceptable. The society was suspended, and disciplinary action was taken. Again, that is what a good response should look like: clear action, visible consequences and a message sent that such behaviour has no place on campuses. That is the reality: it is not just enough to say the right things and put policies and procedures in place; universities have to act, and those actions have to be applied consistently. When they do not act, the consequences can be quite serious.

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

I am encouraged to hear about the experience that my hon. Friend has recounted, but does he share my concern that Jewish students often have limited confidence in universities’ complaints procedures? Quite frequently, reports of antisemitism are dealt with rather slowly or without any form of consequence.

[Mike Reader]

My hon. Friend picks up the next point I want to make. Unfortunately, there have been cases, including at Warwick, where complaints of antisemitism have not been handled well and where those raising concerns have felt unsupported, and that creates a wider culture in which people hesitate to speak up. It may not even be about major incidents; it can be the drip, drip, drip of smaller things and their cumulative effect. Lecturers crossing the line in terms of their professional boundaries, protests that blur into hostility, or a sense that standards and processes are not applied equally to Jewish students—all of that feeds into whether a campus feels inclusive.

However, we should recognise what works. Warwick has developed a strong, outward-facing Jewish community, and perhaps it is not by accident that the newly elected president of the Union of Jewish Students, Raphi Leon, came through Warwick himself. His focus on building connections across campus, rather than retreating into isolation, is exactly the kind approach universities should be supporting.

We know from experiences at Warwick and other places what good practice broadly looks like. It means regular engagement with students and staff. It means clear and accessible reporting systems. It means proper support for chaplaincy and campus groups. Crucially, it means acting consistently and quickly when things go wrong. It should not be complicated, and there is guidance out there, including UJS’s recent “Best Practice Guidance” and “A Good Practice Guide”, published by Lord Mann and the all-party taskforce on antisemitism in higher education, which is supported by the excellent Antisemitism Policy Trust.

The expectations are clear: universities have a duty under equality law to provide a safe environment for all students and staff. The issue is not whether universities can get this right once; it is whether they get it right consistently. In the end, it comes down to leadership. Where leadership is clear, we see confidence and inclusion; where we do not have clear leadership, we see confusion and a loss of trust. Our universities, of all places, should not be environments where people feel like they have to hold back who they are.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure, as always, to serve under your chairship, Sir John. I say a big thank you to the hon. Member for Leeds South West and Morley (Mark Sewards) for introducing the debate, and I congratulate him on doing it so well. I thank all hon. Members who have spoken so far for their contributions highlighting the difficulties faced by our British Jewish communities and the work that needs to be done to protect them.

The StandWithUs UK “Voice of Students” report exposes a terrifying, deep-rooted national crisis across our higher education institutions. The traditional verbal hostility of recent years has escalated into raw intimidation, targeted harassment and physical violence against Jewish students.

I should have welcomed the Minister to his place, and I look forward to his contribution. I am sure it will be salient and will give us some reassurance, which is what we all seek from this debate.

It is no secret that I am a friend of the people and the nation of Israel—I have been all my life, and I continue to be. As I have said before and will say again, I recognise that Israel is not perfect, just as I am not perfect and nobody in this room is perfect. Israel does things that I have concerns about, but I stand by Israel whenever I get the opportunity, and today I will highlight the issue of antisemitism on university campuses.

When I visited Israel some two years ago, we had an opportunity to visit the Nova music festival site and the kibbutzim. If ever we needed to see man’s inhumanity to man and the hatred that the Hamas terrorists have for Israel, that was the day we saw it and that is why I am here to highlight the issue of antisemitism today.

As a Unionist, I believe fundamentally in the rule of law, the right to personal safety and the preservation of free inquiry, yet British universities are failing in their most basic legal and moral duties to protect a religious minority. Most damningly, academic staff are increasingly implicated in fostering, legitimising and actively participating in this marginalisation, which is the reason why we are debating the issue today.

I will highlight a few extracts from the testimony bringing this to light that most shocked me, and I am sure it will be shocking to every Member of the House. Forgive the terminology, but I am going to quote exactly the words used in a number of universities. These are direct quotes of the slurs being faced. Although they are disturbing, they must be put in the Hansard record. For that purpose, I will quote them exactly. At Royal Holloway, a student was subjected to jihadist threats to blow up the Jewish society and faced vile text messages calling him a “faggot Jew boy”. He was trailed by students taking photos to mark him out as a “Zionist”.

At the University of Birmingham, a lecturer told a student to shorten her name because it sounded “very Jewish”, while others performed Nazi salutes and created a group chat entitled, “No Jews allowed”. At King’s College London, a student faced a Kafkaesque punishment by the university to write a 1,000-word essay explaining why displaying an Israeli flag was wrong. He should come to my office, because I have one there and am proud to show that flag and let people know.

At City St George’s, a Jewish student was ambushed from behind and nearly pushed down a staircase, while campus protests featured Arabic chants calling for the literal killing of Jews. That is most outrageous.

[Steve Yemm]

I occasionally meet Jewish students at the University of Nottingham for dinner on a Friday evening, hosted by Chabad. Those students talk about being proud of their faith, but they frequently question whether they can be openly Jewish on campus. Does the hon. Member agree that no student should ever feel that they have to hide their identity on a university campus?

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that intervention. That is another to add to the words of shame from some universities across the United Kingdom. I want to refer to Bangor University, where a professor physically confronted a Jewish student while screaming medieval blood-libel tropes and calling him a “baby killer”. If that level of targeted vicious harassment were directed at any other minority group on campus, the institutions would be shut down, funding would be stripped away and the perpetrators would be immediately expelled. That is what would happen if it were anybody else but, because it is Jews, what happens? When it comes to Jewish students, we see institutional paralysis and a culture of denial.

As an MP from Northern Ireland, I want to comment on Queen’s University Belfast and Ulster University, which are by no means immune to this toxic atmosphere. We have seen a deeply alarming trend where extreme political activism on these campuses has crossed the line from legitimate debate into outright intimidation and the exclusion of Jewish and Zionist voices. I have spoken personally to some of those Jewish students who have given me their testimony and told me their stories. They told me that on occasion they are scared to be active on their own campuses.

When Jewish students in Belfast or Londonderry feel compelled to hide their identity, skip lectures, avoid campus spaces out of fear for their safety, the leadership of those universities has failed fundamentally. Higher education in Northern Ireland must be a neutral, safe and meritocratic environment for everyone. Vice-chancellors in our Province must not remain silent or indifferent. They must apply the exact same zero-tolerance approach to anti-Jewish racism as they do to any other form of sectarianism or discrimination, ensuring that all universities remain places of learning, rather than hotbeds of radicalisation and exclusion.

The report rightly underscores that modern antisemitism has evolved into a toxic political framework. I challenge anybody to say otherwise. Cowardly, it hides behind the shield of extreme anti-Zionism, denying Jewish self-determination and calling for the destruction of Israel. That is a cynical abuse of free speech, designed to make campuses “judenrein”, the German for “Jew-free”. God forbid that day should ever come to this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

We must draw a firm line in the sand, and I believe Members have done that today in this Chamber. These are my two asks of the Minister. First, the UK Government must state unequivocally that anti-Zionism, including calling for the destruction of the Jewish state, will be treated with the exact same seriousness and moral clarity as classical racial antisemitism. Secondly, we must follow the successful precedent set in the United States and summon vice-chancellors before a parliamentary Select Committee to look us in the eye and account for the catastrophic failures in all the universities I mentioned, and probably in many others, such as Nottingham. How many are there?

Our universities cannot remain safe havens for hate speech and terror sympathisers. I believe it is time to restore law, order and basic human decency to campuses. The first step must be the determination in this Chamber today to send a message that while the United Kingdom supports freedom of speech—I believe in that with all my heart and will stick up for it—we do not tolerate threats of violence. These examples show that the line has been crossed and that action must be taken. Let it start today.

Oral Answers to Questions

Steve Yemm Excerpts

Monday 22nd June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Bridget Phillipson]

We recognise the need to make sure that, as we refurbish and rebuild schools across our country, they are well placed to cope with some of the fluctuations in temperature we are seeing, including the hot weather we are experiencing at the moment. Of course, how to manage that best is a matter for headteachers and school leaders. For example, schools can consider relaxing uniform rules during hot weather to make sure that pupils are comfortable, and the Department of Health and Social Care recommends that pupils should not take part in vigorous physical activity when the weather is exceptionally hot, but I trust school leaders to do the right thing to maintain the wellbeing of both staff and students.

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

I recently joined a class of year 5 pupils from St Peter’s school in my constituency on a visit to the National Holocaust Museum in Laxton. I saw at first hand that places such as that are vital to ensuring that young people absorb lessons about the Holocaust. Will the Minister therefore commit to visiting that museum with me and a local school?

[Georgia Gould]

I thank my hon. Friend for his advocacy of the National Holocaust Museum, which plays a critical role in ensuring that children are educated about the Holocaust. That is a key priority for the Government, and I can of course commit to visiting that museum with him—I really welcome his work.

Oral Answers to Questions

Steve Yemm Excerpts

Monday 19th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

4. What steps she is taking to help ensure the integrity of school and college assessments and examinations.

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

I know how hard students around the country work for their exams, and how important it is to ensure consistency and fairness. Ofqual, the qualifications regulator, secures the safe, fair and resilient delivery of qualifications by regulating awarding organisations. As Ministers, we work closely with Ofqual, when needed, to support its work.

[Steve Yemm]

At West Notts college in my constituency of Mansfield, a significant number of learners requested that their English papers be remarked, because an unusually high number of students missed their expected grades. In fact, more than 50% of the papers that were remarked were given a higher grade, with some improving by two grades. The exam board, Pearson Edexcel, told the college that this was due to human error and the marking of one examiner, but later said that it was more widespread. The exam board has now refused to carry out a wider remark of the papers. Will the Minister join me in urging it to ensure that all students receive the grades that they deserve?

[Georgia Gould]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this issue; I am really sorry to hear about the uncertainty that it has caused students at West Notts college. He will understand that I cannot comment on individual cases, but I can say that Ofqual requires all awarding organisations to follow rigorous quality assurance procedures to ensure that marking is consistent and accurate. I understand that Ofqual issued enforcement action against three Pearson cases in December, resulting in a total of £2 million in fines.

Holidays During School Term Time

Steve Yemm Excerpts

Monday 27th October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell.

In Mansfield, 850 people signed this petition because they believe that families deserve some fairness, freedom and a bit of common sense. I believe they also know that a rounded education is about a bit more than attendance and penalty notices. It is also about giving our children experiences, memories and time with their families—the sort of time that helps them to grow, to feel loved and to see the world beyond the classroom.

Let us be honest, for working families in towns such as mine, the idea of a week away in August has become a luxury that very few can afford. When prices triple the moment that schools break up, parents are faced with an impossible choice: break the rules or break the bank. These parents are decent, hard-working people, such as nurses, shop workers, delivery drivers and care assistants. They do everything right. They work all year and pay their taxes, and then they are told that they cannot take their kids away for a few days because it is term time. Working people deserve a break and families deserve a choice, and the state should not be micro-managing family life to this extent.

Last week, I put out a social media post asking people for their comments on this issue ahead of our debate. I have had literally thousands of comments, replies and emails from constituents. The response has been completely overwhelming, and here are just a few of the comments. Katie says:

“There’s a cost of living crisis making it difficult to go on holiday during term time as it is more expensive, we are trying our hardest to ensure our children live a happy and fulfilling life and make sure they have many happy memories.”

Lauren says:

“For many of us, especially those of us who are working in the NHS and other key sectors, aligning leave with school holidays is often impossible. Families are left with that heartbreaking choice—miss out on precious time together or face financial penalties.”

Lisa, whose name I have changed, is a foster parent with disabled children who has also been fined. She said:

“Due to the age and disability of our children, we were very limited by when suitable accommodation was available. Our children’s attendance was otherwise excellent - their only absences were for hospital appointments, over which we have absolutely no control, and there are no concerns with their academic attainment.”

Holly, a constituent of mine who is awaiting a fine, wrote to me:

“School and education is a priority for my family, but to make parents feel like criminals is not acceptable. Let’s remember children get one childhood, and life is not always simple, with family illness, death and other issues that occur, not just holidays.”

That is what life looks like for real families in my constituency and across the UK. They are not asking for weeks and weeks off; they are asking for just a few days every year to make family memories without fear of being fined for it.

Of course children need the best possible education—every one of us wants that—but education is not just about exams and attainment. It is also about experience, balance and wellbeing. Right now, I believe that we have got the balance wrong. Let us trust parents a little more. Let us treat them like adults. Let us show a bit of compassion and common sense, because families in Mansfield and right across our country have made it clear to me—and to all of us, I believe—that they want the freedom to decide what is best for their own children.

Children with SEND: Assessments and Support

Steve Yemm Excerpts

Monday 15th September 2025 Westminster Hall

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Dr Huq. I thank the hon. Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) for her brilliant speech, and I thank the petitioners.

Over the summer, like many hon. Members, I hosted a SEND coffee morning. From those 25 parents, I heard stories of not only love, resilience and determination, but a system they feel is all too often rigged against them. Again and again, I heard about services that do not speak to one another and processes that feel confusing and adversarial. The impact on parents’ mental health and relationships, and on children’s ability to learn and make friends, is real.

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

In line with my hon. Friend’s experience, I have heard from numerous families in Mansfield who have engaged in long battles to obtain EHCPs for their children. Many of them are utterly exhausted by the process, and often they are not offered the support that they are legally entitled to within the statutory timelines. Does he agree that such delays are completely unacceptable, and that they must change?

[Josh Newbury]

I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. I, too, have heard many examples of families who feel that they have had to work almost full time to manage their children’s EHCP processes, and even of some relationships that have broken down because of the strain—on top of the strains that already come with supporting a SEND child.

Parents also constantly raised the issue of waiting times. One mum in Wimblebury told me that she started the process for her daughter in reception but did not get an EHCP until just before she started year 7—and even then only with intensive support from one of our fantastic local councillors, Julie Aston. In fairness to Staffordshire county council, it faces an increase in the number of EHCP applications from around 600 a year up to 2019 to over 2,000 now, but after such a wait, too many children are left with an EHCP drafted by someone who has never even met them.

Another shocking reality is the profiteering that fills the void where state provision falls woefully short: the most expensive placement in my constituency is £166,000 for a single school year. Now, the last thing I would call for is to take the support away from that child—I hope that they are thriving in that setting—but it should shame us that ever more expensive private provision is the only way of meeting the spiralling need.

I have three practical asks rooted in what families have told me. First, we need a fair funding model that is based on need, not postcode. A child supported through the high needs block in Staffordshire receives less than £1,000, but in Camden a child gets more than £3,500. That discrepancy is not defensible. Secondly, we need true multi-agency working in practice—with a single front door for shared assessments, clear escalation routes and shared records—so that parents do not have to retell their story over and over.

Generative Artificial Intelligence: Schools

Steve Yemm Excerpts

Tuesday 8th July 2025 Westminster Hall

[Damian Hinds]

Funnily enough, I agree with the hon. Member, though not necessarily about statutory requirements. It is certainly true—in fact, he inadvertently leads me on to my next point—that we need to be careful and discerning in using these products. There are many risks, including the safeguarding risks inherent in technology, hallucinations, dud information and, as the hon. Member rightly says, biases.

There are some very direct and sharp risks to children. I am afraid that many misleading, unpleasant and cruel things can be done with AI. They can be done already but, as with so many other things, AI magnifies and turbocharges the problem. Some of those things can be done by adults to children; some of them are done by children to other children. We need to be very aware of those risks, some of which relate to existing practices and policy questions, such as how to deal with intimate image abuse and sexting. The problem further supports the case for a comprehensive school-day phone ban, to take cameras out of schools.

More generally, there is a need for media literacy and general discernment. I am reluctant and nervous to talk about media literacy, and more so about the phrase “critical thinking,” because it is too often conflated with the false dichotomy that occasionally comes up in the educational world: knowledge versus skills. Clearly, we need both. We need both in life, and we need to have developed both in school, but knowledge precedes skills because we can only think with what we know. However, it is really important in this context that children know how AI can make mistakes, and that they come to trust and know to look out for the correct primary sources, and trusted brands—trusted sources—rather than just stuff on the internet.

In the 2019 guidance on teaching online safety in schools, since updated, a fusion of the computing, relationships and citizenship curricula was envisaged. Children would be guided through how to evaluate what they see online, how to recognise techniques used for persuasion, and how to understand confirmation bias, as well as misinformation and disinformation. The new edition of “Keeping Children Safe in Education”, which came out yesterday, lists disinformation and misinformation as safeguarding concerns in their own right for the first time. The online safety guidance also included the importance of learning why people might try to bend the truth on the internet and pretend to be someone they are not. That was a start, but at this technological inflection point, it needs a huge scaling up.

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

Does the right hon. Gentleman share my concern about some of the dangers of using generative AI in the classroom, particularly around harmful content and activity? I read the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children’s “Viewing Generative AI and children’s safety in the round”, which gave examples of children creating deepfakes of other children in the class.

Does the right hon. Gentleman also share my concerns about children’s privacy and data protection, and the extent to which many of these edtech applications are created with the aim of minimising data protection? I understand he has concerns about regulation, but this seems to be almost entirely unregulated in the classroom. There is certainly a case for, at the very least, regulating data protection, data to third parties and—

Oral Answers to Questions

Steve Yemm Excerpts

Monday 16th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising that incredibly important issue that we, as a Government, take extremely seriously, because no student should be subject to antisemitism on universities campuses or in any place in our education system. That is why we have committed £7 million of funding to address antisemitism in education. Half a million pounds of that has already been awarded to University Jewish Chaplaincy to support student welfare on university campuses. That runs alongside the new condition of registration from the Office for Students that will ensure we protect students from harassment and discrimination.

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

Given my experience of working with the Holocaust Educational Trust in schools in Mansfield, I ask the Secretary of State to confirm that the history of the Holocaust will be taught in schools following the passage of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which the Conservatives opposed.

Oral Answers to Questions

Steve Yemm Excerpts

Monday 28th April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Catherine McKinnell]

We absolutely support children to have the ability to play, and that is really important in school as well. We understand that some schools require additional support. We are working closely with the sector to ensure the best outcomes for all children, not just some children, as the previous Government focused on.

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

Local Conservative council candidates in Mansfield say on the doorstep that they want better funding for our schools. However, in the pursuit of restoring private schools’ tax breaks, which of these measures does the Minister think the Tories would cut first: new teachers, speech and language support, mental health counsellors, careers advice or work experience?

[Catherine McKinnell]

rose—

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Steve Yemm Excerpts

Tuesday 18th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Nick Timothy]

The Minister gave me a frown but she can intervene and admit the success of English schools in those rankings if she wishes.

It is why, when Michaela was once again selected—[Interruption.] Would the Minister like to intervene? No, apparently not. It is why, when Michaela was once again the best-ranked school in the country for progress, the Secretary of State could not bring herself even to congratulate Katherine Birbalsingh when I invited her to do so from these Benches. It is why the Education Secretary’s special adviser briefed the newspapers that Ms Birbalsingh is a liar, and why he briefed the newspapers against Amanda Spielman, former head of Ofsted, attacking her very personally as a “failure” and a Conservative.

As Margaret Thatcher, not just a former Prime Minister but a former Education Secretary, once said:

“If they attack you personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.”

And this is the truth: the Education Secretary does not have a single political argument for this disgraceful act of policy vandalism, but she is determined to ignore those who know better than her and push on. And the people who lose out, I am afraid, will be the children, from ordinary working families the length and breadth of the country, denied the best we can give them, unaware that a better and brighter future has been stolen from them thanks to nothing more than vindictive left-wing dogma.

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

It is an absolute pleasure to speak in support of the Bill, which delivers on the Government’s mission to break down barriers to opportunity. The Bill will drive high and rising standards in school, cut the cost of sending children to school for my constituents and make life easier for families in my area. Its landmark reforms to safeguarding and children’s social care will stop children from falling through the cracks.

Apprenticeships and T-Levels

Steve Yemm Excerpts

Wednesday 20th November 2024 Westminster Hall

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Christopher.

Making sure that our young people have access to a wide range of educational opportunities that can lead them on to high-quality, well-paid and secure employment is vital to the health of our economy. In fact, it is critical to towns like Mansfield, which are to some extent facing a brain drain due to poor investment in employment opportunities and a weak private sector. They also have the difficulties with productivity and gross value added highlighted by the right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds); those are a real challenge in constituencies like mine.

In July, I was elected with a mandate for change locally. I stood on a platform to focus on five local missions that I thought would have a significant impact. One was to do everything I could to facilitate a stable and growing local economy and good-quality jobs for everyone in my constituency. Of course, a critical part of that is ensuring that there is a wide range of high-calibre academic and vocational education opportunities. I therefore welcome the debate.

Without a highly skilled workforce, areas like mine cannot attract the investment we need, and we know that investment brings prosperity for our communities. I am delighted that the Government made additional money available in the Budget for further education and have announced reforms to the apprenticeship system, with a new growth and skills levy. I welcome the progress and know that the Government have aspirations to do more over the coming months and years. I want Mansfield to be part of that conversation.

I have had a number of discussions with West Notts college and Nottingham Trent University about their funding streams and ways they feel they can work together more effectively to bring exactly those types of opportunities in the further and higher education sector to young people and adults in my constituency. As part of that, we have seen a £6.5 million education investment from Nottingham Trent University in my constituency, which is delivering specialist teaching and learning facilities to support local people to upskill and to access and retain employment in the local area. That includes really important opportunities in nursing, aligned with the local health authority, and in engineering, business, criminal justice and sports science. I congratulate both those parties on their work to enabled all of that to come to fruition.

I see latent potential to build on that collaboration between HE and FE in my constituency, which might be called “the Mansfield model”, across further education. By cutting red tape and streamlining the effectiveness of funding, like in the West Notts college and Nottingham Trent University joint campus in my constituency, it would be possible to unleash the power of further education provision. Given the success in my local area, I recently wrote to invite the Secretary of State for Education to Mansfield. I would be delighted to host a Minister from the Department, so that they can see directly how the local model could be used as a blueprint to improve skills and attract important private sector investment into towns like mine.