Pride Month

Zöe Franklin Excerpts

Thursday 4th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)]

I start by saying that I am honoured to be the spokesperson for this debate and to speak after some incredibly powerful speeches. In particular, I acknowledge the work of the hon. Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) and her words today. I thank her for all she does on human rights, and particularly for her advocacy for the trans community. I am not sure how I will follow what she has shared. I know that there will be more to come in the Chamber, and that there will probably be more tears.

Pride Month is a celebration of visibility, dignity and progress, but it should also be a moment of honesty. Despite the hard-fought progress we have made as a nation, we are slipping backwards on LGBT rights in this country. In 2025, the UK fell six places to 22nd in ILGA-Europe’s LGBT rights ranking; to put that into context, we were ranked No. 1 in Europe in 2015. When it comes to gender recognition rights, the UK now ranks in the bottom six of 49 European countries. That should concern every Member of this House who believes in the fundamental rights of equality, freedom and human dignity.

Pride Month matters because standing up for the LGBT community is ultimately about standing up for everyone’s right to live openly, safely and authentically. It says that no matter who you are, who you love or how you present, you are equally valued and equally respected. This House should remember that progress in LGBT equality has never been inevitable. Every single right was fought for by campaigners, activists and political allies who refused to accept the discrimination that was the status quo. Our thanks should and do go to every single one of them.

The Liberal Democrats are proud to have stood alongside that movement for decades. We fought to repeal section 28—the legislation that silenced LGBT people in schools and communities, and that told an entire generation that who they were was something shameful. I have two sons, and through them I have seen how different education is now from when I was at school. I am incredibly grateful to be able to see how education has changed. I can see that young people living as their authentic selves has become supported by schools. Most inspiringly, I have watched so many young people come through my door who are living and exploring who they are. I think that we should all take inspiration from so many of the next generation, who are simply letting each other love who they want to love and be who they want to be.

As a party, the Liberal Democrats were instrumental in delivering equal marriage. Our former Equalities Minister, Lynne Featherstone—now Baroness Featherstone in the other place—led the fight inside Government to make marriage equality a reality in this country. I am deeply proud that we led that fight, and I have been deeply moved by the couples who have generously shared with me their stories about what that change meant for them as a couple and for their families.

In spite of all that progress, this year has been a particularly upsetting year for much of the LGBT community, especially trans, non-binary and intersex people, following the Supreme Court ruling on the definition of sex in the Equality Act. Like many Members across this House, I have received deeply distressing accounts from constituents who are fearful that they will not be able to participate fully in public life going forward.

Let me be clear: trans rights and human rights are not in conflict. After the Supreme Court ruling, the Government’s responsibility was to provide clear and workable guidance, but the EHRC’s code of practice, laid before Parliament just two weeks ago, is, in its current form, exclusionary, unworkable and deeply concerning. Even the Government’s own equality impact assessment acknowledges disproportionate harm to those with protected characteristics. It warns that women who do not conform to cultural expectations of what a woman should look like could face challenges simply in accessing a women-only space. It acknowledges the negative impact on disabled people, with Disability Rights UK warning against forcing trans and non-binary people into separate, third spaces. Most alarmingly, it explicitly states that some trans people could effectively be barred from both spaces aligned with their gender identity and spaces aligned with their birth sex, leaving them with no space in services at all. That is not dignity; it is exclusion.

I am personally worried for the whole trans community, particularly the next generation of trans men and women. With all the changes in the way that the LGBT community are being spoken about here in the UK, and with the stories that have been shared by Members already about certain political parties and individuals, what is that saying to the next generation? What world are we leaving as a legacy? We have to act now before it is too late. That is why my right hon. Friend Ed Davey and our women and equalities spokesperson—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. The hon. Lady has been here nearly two years. We must stop referring to Members by their names—it has been rife today. Members must be referred to by their constituencies, please.

[Zöe Franklin]

I do apologise, Madam Deputy Speaker.

That is why my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey) and my hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Marie Goldman) have called upon the Government to withdraw the code and ensure that this issue is properly scrutinised by Parliament.

Guidance of this significance should not simply be pushed through as a statutory instrument subject to the negative procedure, without proper democratic debate or a vote in this House. Alongside parliamentary scrutiny of the code, there are urgent actions that the Government could take now. One meaningful and long-overdue step would be finally to implement a fully trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices. That was proposed back in 2018 by Theresa May’s Government, but it still has not happened. I have attended many Pride events and talked to people about a ban, and they are not aware that a ban is not already in place, and they are frankly shocked.

The Government promised in the last King’s Speech to publish a draft Bill, but they did not. They promised again to do so in this King’s Speech, and although I thank the Minister for her comments on this issue, I join the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) in pressing the Minister for clarity on a timeline. The LGBT community cannot wait until the end of this Session, only to see the same promise broken yet again. Conversion practices are barbaric. They are based on the offensive idea that LGBT people are somehow broken and in need of fixing. The practices cause profound psychological harm and have absolutely no place in a modern society.

This Pride month, let us celebrate the progress that generations before us fought so hard to achieve. Let us also recognise that equality is never guaranteed and that we are in an incredibly fragile place. At a time when LGBT people, particularly trans people, are increasingly being used as a political football in divisive culture wars, this House has a responsibility to stand firmly on the side of dignity, compassion and human rights. Pride must always be more than a celebration; it must be a year-round promise that we will keep fighting until everyone is truly free to live openly and equally without fear.

Local Authority Children’s Services

Zöe Franklin Excerpts

Wednesday 28th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Woking (Mr Forster) for securing this important debate. He made a powerful speech on behalf of his vulnerable constituents, and vulnerable people across the county of Surrey and beyond.

The central failing I want to highlight is this: Surrey county council—my constituency’s local authority for children’s services—repeatedly chooses not to use its statutory powers even when children are unsafe, out of education or legally entitled to support. Children and families across Guildford are feeling the consequences. Schools are often the first to spot safeguarding concerns. Headteachers and designated safeguarding leads do not raise alarms lightly. They do so because they are often the only professionals with consistent daily insight into a child’s wellbeing.

At a meeting last year, a headteacher told us that safeguarding thresholds in Surrey are far higher than in comparable authorities. Referrals stall and the council is reluctant to move from voluntary support to formal safeguarding processes. That is often justified by the family resilience model. Of course, there is nothing wrong with a strengths-based approach, but the issue is how it is applied.

One headteacher at the meeting described, with visible emotion, a child in her school showing clear signs of neglect and abuse. The headteacher followed safeguarding procedures and referred the case to Surrey but, instead of investigating, the council informed the parents that a safeguarding concern had been raised and the parents removed the child from the school. That headteacher told us that she lies awake at night not knowing where that child is or whether they are safe. That is not an isolated incident. My hon. Friend the Member for Woking referred to Sara Sharif, the most tragic example in Surrey.

Those safeguarding failures are deeply linked to failures in education. In an example from my constituency, a looked-after child is approaching a critical educational transition, but approval for an appropriate placement has been delayed because that child is in temporary accommodation outside Surrey due to a shortage of placements. Despite Surrey being the corporate parent, it treated geography as a barrier rather adapting the system. There are many other examples I could share.

I have several questions for the Minister but, given the time, I will write to him. Today, I simply want to ask whether he will commit to reviewing whether Surrey county council is meeting its statutory safeguarding educational duties, particularly in relation to thresholds for intervention. Children in Surrey need a system that acts without hesitation when their safety, welfare or education is at risk. I urge the Government to do all they can to ensure Surrey county council meets its legal responsibilities. I fully support my hon. Friend the Member for Woking’s call for the Government to intervene in Surrey to keep children safe.

Oral Answers to Questions

Zöe Franklin Excerpts

Monday 19th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Bridget Phillipson]

The right hon. Gentleman makes an understandable appeal on behalf of his constituency and his region. We are looking carefully at questions of funding. They are not easy questions, and he will recognise that many of the ways that funding has previously been allocated have continued because of the necessary timescales around that. However, his constituents will also benefit from the big investment that we are putting into capital and into extra training and support for all teachers, early years professionals and college staff. I want us to try, across the House, to find the ability to work together to tackle this big and deep challenge that we all face: support for children with SEND.

[Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)]

In my constituency, the challenge that has been highlighted over and over again by the schools that I speak to is not necessarily about early identification, but having the resources and the places available for students once they have been identified. Will the Minister explain how the Government’s approach to early access will ensure that early identification is matched by a suitable vision in an environment that meets the child’s stated needs?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I have had many conversations of a similar nature with school leaders and others. The hon. Lady is right about the need for not only early identification but early access; they are not always the same thing. That will apply beyond the school gate, to speech and language support, occupational therapy support and much more besides. I can assure the hon. Lady that everything she has mentioned is central to our thinking in respect of the reform that we intend to introduce through the schools White Paper, and I should be more than happy to continue to work with Liberal Democrat Members on areas of concern so that we can seek to get this right and build a consensus.

Children with SEND: Assessments and Support

Zöe Franklin Excerpts

Monday 15th September 2025 Westminster Hall

[Dr Savage]

I thank the hon. Member for her intervention, and I agree.

Secondly, individual need absolutely must be at the heart of provision. Every child, and their needs, is different. Generic packages or waiting until needs become acute undermines potential. Provision must be tailored so that each child can achieve as much as they are capable of. Thirdly, we need capacity and accountability. The system should get decisions right the first time.

[Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)]

There are some tragic stories of horrendous errors with EHCPs in my constituency. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is incredibly important that accountability is maintained in the system? If we cannot get it right now, how will we be able to—under the potential threat of EHCPs no longer existing—ensure that families and children are protected and get the support they need, and that the accountability of county councils and local authorities is maintained?

Generative Artificial Intelligence: Schools

Zöe Franklin Excerpts

Tuesday 8th July 2025 Westminster Hall

[Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy. I thank the right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds) for securing this important debate.

AI use in schools has reached a critical juncture. According to Ofcom, 50% of children aged eight to 17 have already used AI tools. The Alan Turing Institute and LEGO report that 60% of teachers actively use generative AI. We have heard many colleagues across the Chamber today reference that. AI is everywhere, whether through explicit choice or integration into Google Workspace, Microsoft 365 Education and countless educational tools. The Government have funded AI development for teachers to speed lesson planning and reduce workloads, positioning AI as central to educational transformation. Yet, as 5Rights highlights, no statutory standards currently govern genAI use in schools.

The Government’s own AI opportunities action plan fails to address children and their rights and development needs, despite encouraging schools to

“move fast and learn things”

when piloting these technologies. With AI’s undeniable rise, the Government really need to address this head on, hence today’s debate is incredibly important.

We have heard across the room today that AI presents genuine opportunities for education. For teachers struggling with budget cuts from the last Conservative Government, AI can ease the burden of lesson planning, marking and administrative tasks. For students, responsible engagement with these technologies prepares them for tomorrow’s world of work. Those who understand technological change and harness AI effectively will thrive in today’s and tomorrow’s economy. They will be prepared for an AI-dominated world where critical thinking and analysis become even more vital.

However, serious concerns are emerging about generative AI’s impact. Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology research indicates that

“over-reliance on AI tools could lead to the erosion of teaching, writing and reasoning skills”.

The MIT Media Lab recently released a study that was so urgent, it published it before peer review. The study showed that students using ChatGPT showed dramatically lower brain activity than those writing without AI. Brain scans revealed a 32% drop in cognitive load. After just weeks of use, 83% could not even remember what they had supposedly written. That is really concerning information. We can understand why it was so keen to publish it, despite the fact that it had not yet been peer reviewed.

The voices of concern grow louder, UNESCO warns that AI roll-out is

“outpacing the adaptation of national regulatory frameworks.”

Even industry leaders in the Alan Turing Institute acknowledge we have

“limited evidence on the impact of AI use in education on learners’ development”.

Evidence mounts about the negative effects of an unsafe online world. Research by 5Rights and the London School of Economics found that

“EdTech products used in schools are highly invasive of children’s privacy and rely on the extensive collection of children’s data.”

As we heard earlier, the NSPCC has documented cases where generative AI created deepfakes of children in schools, and the Children’s Commissioner has called for urgent action. This is particularly concerning given that many AI tools have not been developed with the younger audience in mind.

We Liberal Democrats call for a public health approach to the online world, including AI, to ensure that children remain safe online and can enjoy their childhood as intended. We also call on the Government to introduce a safer screens taskforce that would be empowered to ensure a public health approach to children’s social media across all Government Departments, and lead research into social media’s impact on children. We believe that the UK must lead the world in building a future where AI is developed and deployed ethically, transparently and in the public interest. We favour a workable and well-resourced framework for AI that can promote innovation and protect individual rights and freedoms. We call on the Government to establish a cross-sector AI regulator, combining flexible, ethical oversight and technological expertise to ensure that the UK keeps pace with rapid technological advances.

As Liberal Democrats, we also believe that we should modernise our curriculum to face 21st century challenges, offering an approach that allows students to explore pathways in science, maths and the arts without prejudicing their learning in other disciplines. Such a curriculum must embed digital and data literacy throughout children’s learning experience, preparing every single student for a future shaped by AI and new technologies.

I have a few questions for the Minister, which I hope he will answer in his remarks. What skills audit has been done to ensure that we have the right skills for AI, and for working alongside AI, such as critical thinking? We welcome DFE guidance that pupils should only be using generative AI in education settings with appropriate safeguards in place, such as close supervision. But where is the implementation guidance, and where are the resources for schools to achieve this? Finally, how will this Government prevent AI from widening inequality between those with access and those without?

Once again, I am grateful for being able to take part in this debate, and I thank the right hon. Member for East Hampshire for bringing it to this Chamber. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s comments, which I hope will be just the start of an ongoing conversation on this incredibly important issue, as we look to the future of our young people.

Financial Education

Zöe Franklin Excerpts

Thursday 6th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew) for securing this important debate. I find the statistics about what children remember of financial literacy education really sad. It is not that teachers do not want to provide the education but, as others have raised, there is stretched time in the current education system, and perhaps a lack of confidence among teachers.

I have a 17-year-old son, and have asked him a number of times whether he has had the opportunity to learn about budgeting at school. Perhaps this just speaks to the memory of a 17-year-old child, but he, like many of his friends, does not remember having had that important opportunity to learn how to budget—most likely, he did not. I sat down with him at the weekend to go through it, and realised how much we, as adults, take for granted the things that we have learned over the course of life. We should not be relying on the passage of time and the experience of life; we need to educate our young people about financial literacy from a really early age.

As a Liberal Democrat and as a mum, I think it is really important that we use the curriculum review to modernise it, and look at a curriculum for life. This is the perfect opportunity to include financial literacy. My personal view, which might raise eyebrows across the House, is that putting it into the maths curriculum might help young people to see maths as something that is relevant to their real lives. I am sure that we have all had conversations with teenagers who ask, “How is maths relevant to my life?” They say that it is not. Well, it very much will be when they get into adulthood and have to deal with mortgages, household budgeting and the rest.

The reality of household budgeting came to the forefront of my mind when I met with Christians Against Poverty in my constituency, which does fantastic work with people who have got into debt, often through no fault of their own—through the cost of living crisis and personal circumstances. However, at the root of it is often a lack of financial literacy. We clearly need to provide more opportunities for young people, as well as for adults, because we have already said that young people tend to get their financial education from their parents.

I ask the Minister to ensure that there is a deep commitment in the curriculum review to putting financial education into the curriculum in a way that will help children to remember it and take it forward in their lives. I also ask her to support adults to get the financial education that they need so that they can complete the circle of empowering themselves to be better with their finances, and empowering the next generation.