Josh MacAlister MP: speeches

Speeches

• 25 Feb 2026 · Student Loan Repayment Plans · Hansard source

  More

  I can confirm, as the Secretary of State for Education said earlier this week, this is an issue that we will, of course, look at. The plan 2 system was introduced in 2012 by the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats in coalition. At the time, my party raised concerns about the design of that student loan package. When it was introduced, the threshold for repayment was only £21,000. Having said they would increase the threshold, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats then froze it. They froze it in 2012, its first year; they froze it in 2013, in 2014 and in 2015: four years of Liberal Democrat and Conservative freezes to thresholds. The Conservatives then froze it in 2016. They froze it in 2017 and then again in 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024. In total, there was a decade’s worth of freezes by parties who designed the model that they now stand here criticising. There is one phrase for that: crocodile tears.

• 25 Feb 2026 · Student Loan Repayment Plans · Hansard source

  More

  That is a very timely intervention, because when we were elected we recognised the pressures and acted. In this Parliament, the Government are lifting the plan 2 repayment threshold to £29,385, ending a four-year freeze. We have acted to ensure that the threshold rises to above average graduate salaries, because that was the right thing to do, despite the fiscal pressures we faced. Due to the enormous pressures on budgets and the need for fairness across the education system, especially in further education, and to support the long-term sustainability of the student loan system, we announced at Budget 2025 that the Government will freeze plans for repayment thresholds at £29,385 for three years from April 2027. I note that, even with that freeze, a borrower earning £30,000 will repay around £4 a month and the average plan 2 borrower will repay about £8 more a month. The freeze will generate £5.9 billion—money that this Government are investing back into young people. We are making improvements to the education system, and the threshold freeze contributes to that. The improvements are happening both in higher education and in the wider skills landscape. We will be investing £1.2 billion more in skills training per year by 2028-29, ensuring that we develop and nurture the skills that many young people who do not go to university need for the future. We are supporting colleges, apprenticeships and technical training, areas that have too long been neglected by other parties, with record funding. I see the benefits of much of that in my constituency, where many young people choose to pursue education through vocational and technical routes. We are setting up technical excellence colleges, ripping out the red tape from the apprenticeship system, and ensuring that more foundation apprenticeships get young people into trades and careers that give them a brighter future. Politics is about choices. When a Government come in and all public services are in a mess, they have to work through their priorities. Just this week, we have announced generational changes to the special educational needs system. Just today, the Government are announcing major changes to ensure that people can see timely justice in the courts. We are also making changes to improve the student finance system. First, from January 2027, the lifelong learning entitlement will enable learners to use student loans more flexibly than ever before. Secondly, from the 2028-29 academic year, we will introduce targeted, means-tested grants, which, again, were scrapped by the previous Government. Thirdly, to support students from the most disadvantaged backgrounds, we are future-proofing our maintenance loan offer, with loans for living costs increasing in line with forecast inflation every academic year. This Government recognise the strength of feeling on the student loan system, particularly plan 2, and we will always look at issues that are important to the public. We will continue to keep this system under review.

• 24 Feb 2026 · Foster Care: Recruitment and Retention · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is at risk of taking me off down two very important subjects that I would love to spend an entire Westminster Hall debate talking about. Briefly, I want to see the fostering approval system change so that it is sensitive to the differences between approving, for example, a known person to that child who will only ever foster that child, and approving foster carers who are doing it through the more conventional route. The problem at the moment, as I have heard from many kinship carers, is that they are held to standards that are just not appropriate. Grandparents are being given a hard time because they vape, or because they have only one spare room and they are wanting to look after two grandchildren. I want all that swept away so that we can have a common-sense system that gets behind the people who are already in that child’s life and love them, so that that becomes the central focus of how we structure the care system. Similarly for reunification practice, it is important that people recognise more widely that the route from living with parents to living in care often involves going back and forth many times, and it should not. We need to build a care system that can wrap around families and parents who might be struggling. The option of part-time foster care or family fostering can offer real value. I did a radio call-in this morning on that very point and spoke to a young care-experienced person called Mary who had that experience of moving in and out of care. I think she said her mum was bipolar. Mary’s mum loves her and can offer some care and support to her, so it would be great if the care system could bolster Mary’s family rather than replace Mary’s family, if it is safe to do so. That is what we should try to do at every step with the care system. Secondly, we will scale and support innovation to get new carers and look after the ones who are already caring, because retention is as important as recruitment. We will double down on Mockingbird, the programme of support for existing foster carers, funding another 100 constellations. We will also set new standards of support for all carers so that they can benefit from the features that make Mockingbird such a success. We will take Room Makers, first started in Greater Manchester—a programme that sounds very similar to the one mentioned by the hon. Member for South West Devon—to national roll-out. At least £25 million will fund extensions or renovations so that children can stay connected for longer, or grow up with their brothers and sisters in the same house. We will launch a fostering innovation programme to bring forward even more new thinking, with a focus on new and flexible models of care, like weekenders, step down, and specialist care and support for retention. Specifically, I have been delighted to work with colleagues in the Ministry of Justice to set up a new programme to scale up remand fostering so that children do not unnecessarily enter young offender institutions. Through all of that, we will encourage partnerships between fostering hubs and independent fostering associations, as the hon. Member for South West Devon has highlighted. Renewing fostering means opening up to new models of care and new families. The Government welcome that innovation. Thirdly, we will rewrite the rulebook around fostering, prioritising making foster care feel human, loving and normal for children, and respected and supported for carers. We have launched a rapid consultation on changes to the allegations process, which has been a source of complaint for many years. We are doing that so that it is fairer for carers and does not unduly rock existing strong relationships. We have launched a call for evidence on a range of issues, including a foster care national register and consistency of allowances. We will be setting out a process of analysing the variation of allowances across the country in order to highlight the point that hon. Members have raised. We will make some changes around the distinctive role of kinship and connected carers in fostering, and the training and support that they need. That will lead to a rewriting of national minimum standards and other statutory guidance for fostering at the earliest opportunity. We will take immediate steps to clarify that foster carers must be respected in conversations about their child among professionals. We are also immediately taking action to clarify that the day-to-day decisions about children, such as permissions to get haircuts and overnight stays, should be made by foster carers by default, not exception. We are rewriting the rulebook to put long-lasting relationships first, and that will be part of wider action to take on myths about who can and cannot care. Our vision is a fostering system built on relationships that last. By recruiting and retaining more carers, acting regionally, innovating, supporting families and simplifying the rules, we will create thousands more foster families across England that are closer to children’s communities and schools. We know we can do that because the appetite is there in the country; we are just failing to convert it. We have done it in recent history: the Homes for Ukraine scheme showed what we can do when confronted with a problem. Civic society and Government can be mobilised in harmony towards a shared goal. This is a decisive moment for fostering in England; together we will ensure that every child who could thrive in foster care has the option of a home to grow up in, with the love, stability and opportunity that they deserve. Question put and agreed to .

• 24 Feb 2026 · Foster Care: Recruitment and Retention · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy. I thank both the hon. Member for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith) for securing the debate and other Members for their interventions. This is my first opportunity to talk about the fostering action plan in Parliament, so I thank the hon. Lady for allowing me to set out some of the details and to respond to the points she rightly raised. Since my appointment last September, I have made renewing our fostering system my No. 1 priority as the Minister for Children and Families. Through extensive engagement and discussion, we have pulled together a bold plan, recognising the urgency of the problem that faces us. Earlier this month, we published our action plan, six-week consultation and call for evidence to renew fostering and create 10,000 additional foster care places by the end of this Parliament. We have done this 100 years on from the Adoption of Children Act 1926—the centenary of adoption and fostering as we know it—which created much of the framework that we now work within. Now is the time to renew our fostering system. Foster care numbers are in decline: the total number has dropped by 12% since 2019, and we face a major demographic challenge because around one third of current carers are over 60, which will compound the problem in the years ahead. There are currently appalling conversion rates and unacceptable delays in approving carers. The 150,000 inquiries made last year only saw 7,300 newly approved foster carers, and 59% of fostering assessments in local authorities take more than six months. All that is driving pressure on residential care, resulting in children living in residential care settings when they could—and should—be living in family-based homes. There was a 24% increase in children living in residential care between 2020 and 2025, with the number now at over 18,000 children. Yet research looking at children’s needs shows that 45% of children in residential care have the same level of need as those in foster care. The result of that pressure on many foster carers is poor matches, a lack of support and an outdated rulebook that signals a lack of trust and respect. The total impact of all that on our children is that too many are forced to live away from their school, friends and family. There are too many matches that mean they do not get the connections they need, and too many are in residential care when it is not the right fit for them. The status quo and fostering decline run at complete odds with our wider reforms to children’s social care. It means that we are breaking rather than making lifelong, loving relationships and driving the cost escalator towards ever-expanding residential care, and there is evidence of profiteering. Between 2020 and 2025, spending on residential care doubled to £3.7 billion. Our wider reforms will keep more families safely together and mean greater support for kinship options. They are backed by a major reform programme and £2.4 billion of additional spending. Even with all that, renewing our fostering system demands real focus, national leadership and ambition. I will set out the actions we are taking to give thousands more children in care the choices they need to have the enduring relationships that must become the obsession of the care system. First, to make sure that the whole of the English system is galvanised by the target that we have set of 10,000 care places, we are renewing local authority fostering teams and expanding fostering hubs that have made meaningful progress to take on the full end-to-end process. We are pushing fostering hubs to take on the whole process rather than just the initial inquiry stage. According to our plans, the majority of local authorities in England this year will recruit and train foster carers in end-to-end hubs. Those hubs will be held to account for rolling out the most effective features of existing hubs, so that we can get the conversion rates up. We will also launch new hubs in the coming weeks. Further to that, we will create the second wave of regional care co-operatives with greater clarity: they will not simply be commissioning bodies but directly create provision and be tied to fostering hubs. To respond to the points raised around IFAs by the hon. Member for South West Devon, the RCC’s role is in many respects to strike a better relationship with the not-for-profit and profit-making sectors in both fostering and residential care. Throughout the whole process of building the plans I have engaged with independent fostering organisations and will continue to do that. They have value to add into the process and can bring innovation into it. But I want to add a word of caution: there is evidence from Competition and Markets Authority studies that profit-making independent fostering bodies cost more on average than local authority fostering, and it is being done for profit. With the direction of travel that we have seen the residential care system going in, we are now at a point where about 90% of all residential care is run on a for-profit basis and where the largest companies demonstrate behaviour that amounts to profiteering. I do not want to see that replicated in the fostering system, so we need to grip it before that happens. Market failure will be the result of inaction from the Government in this field, and I will not tolerate that. All other local authorities that are not in an RCC or a fostering hub will be set stretching targets to approve, and we will set new standards on the process overall. Ofsted will update its inspection framework to hold those local authorities to account. We are also consulting on whether the role of fostering panels for approvals should be changed, and whether that adds value to the process commensurate with the time and cost involved in those fostering panels. We will launch a digital platform to speed up the process. All of that should speed up conversion rates and get more approved carers as soon as possible.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Kinship Carer Identification · Hansard source

  More

  I would be absolutely delighted to recognise Sue Nash and the amazing work that she and so many others are doing across the country through kinship support groups. The Government have supported the charity Kinship to run 140 peer support groups and training packages across England so that kinship carers have a platform to support one another and navigate the complex systems that sit around the kinship family system. We widened therapeutic help for children through the adoption and special guardianship support fund, for which I recently announced an extension of two years and a 10% increase so that we can continue to meet the needs of adoptive and special guardianship families. We have introduced the first national definition of kinship care, published statutory guidance and appointed a national kinship care ambassador. We will continue to go further. I know that many kinship carers face financial hardship. That is why the Government will very soon launch a large trial, which will represent the largest single financial investment in kinship carers this country has ever seen, to test the impact of providing a weekly financial allowance equal to the national minimum allowance for foster carers in a number of local authorities across the country. The allowance will not be means-tested and will not impact benefits such as universal credit.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Kinship Carer Identification · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Worcester (Tom Collins) for securing a debate on this important matter. Like him, I recognise the enormous contribution that kinship carers make to children’s lives. This Government are committed to helping more children grow up in safe, stable and loving homes within their family networks, wherever it is in the child’s best interests. I want to begin by acknowledging the incredible commitment and generosity of kinship carers. By opening their hearts and homes to some of the country’s most vulnerable children, they are transforming the future generation. We should not underestimate the life-changing difference that kinship carers make every single day to children across this country. Kinship children and families need support to navigate the very challenging circumstances they find themselves in.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Kinship Carer Identification · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for mentioning that. The tireless campaigning of so many kinship families over the years has led the Government to the point of setting in train these changes, which will be announced in full very soon. The fantastic work done by the all-party parliamentary group on kinship care, which my hon. Friend chairs, means that we are now in a position to take these steps in the next few weeks. Through the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, we are legislating to require every local authority to publish a clear and accessible kinship local offer setting out the support available to kinship carers and children. The national kinship care ambassador will provide support and expertise to help local authorities to implement that new national duty, and will shortly release a national report summarising learning generated through engagement with the sector. That is the first step in creating a national kinship standard for a consistent kinship care framework across the country, tackling directly the current postcode lottery in support. My hon. Friend the Member for Worcester raised the importance of kinship carers having employment leave rights equal to those of parents who are adopting. I reassure my hon. Friend and the House that the Government are considering that. We have launched a review of the parental leave system, and it is clear that kinship carers, and the parental leave to which they are entitled, are within the scope of the review. I thank all the carers who have taken the time to respond to the review. We will also improve data by adding a kinship indicator to the schools census in autumn 2026, and launch the first national study focused on children’s experiences in kinship care. It is vital to ensure that children have someone advocating for them in education. We will ensure that the virtual school head role has statutory footing for children in kinship care in 2027. Of course, the generational reforms to special educational needs and disabilities announced today will support many children in kinship families. We know that the legal routes through which kinship care arrangements are made can be confusing, and carry different assessments and entitlements to different forms of support, which is why we have asked the Law Commission to review the kinship legal frameworks. Together, those actions show how serious the Government are about ensuring that kinship carers, children and families are recognised, supported and valued. On the specific issue of identification for kinship carers, I am aware that there is an existing campaign promoting the need for kinship carer ID, led by Kinship Carers UK. I thank that organisation for the work that it has undertaken to shine such an important spotlight on the issue. It is of the utmost importance that our national health service and other public services have robust systems in place to ensure that parental responsibility is recognised quickly and efficiently in all situations in which a child is no longer being cared for by their parents, whether temporarily or permanently. It is concerning to hear of instances in which vulnerable children have been denied access to appropriate and timely medical treatment because of a combination of existing processes failing and a lack of understanding by professionals about kinship care. The issue of professionals not understanding kinship care is not unique to health services. Just last week, I was in Newcastle speaking to kinship carers who told me about their experience working with their children’s schools, and the continued need to re-explain the status of their special guardianship order. I have also heard of cases in which kinship carers have copies of their SGOs, but professionals still seek further verification of the validity of those documents. The challenge is not simply to have a document that sets out parental responsibility or the role that a carer has in a child’s life, but to ensure that services understand the nature of the orders. I agree that we need a clear way for kinship families to demonstrate where they have parental rights, and that it is a recognised and accepted process wherever it is needed. However, the more pressing concern is ensuring that professionals across all our services recognise and understand kinship care. I am committed to having conversations with Kinship Carers UK, my hon. Friend the Member for Worcester, the Department of Health and Social Care, the Ministry of Justice, and local authority colleagues to explore the best way to ensure that the situation of kinship children and their carers is recognised and understood, and that they get the support they need in a timely manner, ensuring that public services do not add more stress during what can already be extremely stressful times. Across the House, we agree that kinship carers are remarkable people who step in during extraordinary circumstances and times to give their kin a safe, stable and loving home within their family network. We all agree that it is not acceptable that there are situations in which children are experiencing unnecessary delays in receiving important medical treatment or other public services, due to challenges in providing the legal status of the guardian. I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s contribution to this debate. He is a strong advocate for kinship care, and I thank others for their interventions. I look forward to speaking to my hon. Friend in future about the progress we are making for kinship children and families, and to working with him on the specific issue of ensuring that kinship carers and family members are able to prove parental responsibility as easily as possible, so that they can step up and step into the lives of those children readily and easily. Question put and agreed to.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Kinship Carer Identification · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for raising that point. It is because of stories exactly like that one—from aunts, uncles, grandparents and other relatives across the country who often step into these children’s lives at sometimes no notice, waking up one morning to find that they are now responsible for very young children, sometimes babies and newborns—that I recommended a whole series of changes when I undertook the independent review of children’s social care in 2022. In that review, I described kinship carers as the “silent and unheard majority” of the care system. Under this Government, they are now being heard. I will set out a few of the things the Government are taking forward now and in the coming weeks to change the situation for kinship carers across this country. To ensure that family networks and kinship care are always fully explored—there are good examples in Northern Ireland, as the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) mentioned, and elsewhere in the UK—we are legislating right now to require all local authorities to offer a family group decision-making process such as a family group conference to all parents, or those with parental responsibility, whose child’s case has reached the pre-proceedings stage. That will bake in the need for services to engage proactively with the whole family network, not just parents, to establish whether the family themselves have a better answer for looking after that child than the care system. That, more than anything else, will probably be the factor that shifts the culture within children’s social care to put the initial focus on kinship networks. That will be backed by the roll-out of family network support packages so that councils can fund some of the more informal arrangements that are a way of avoiding the need for children to enter the care system.

• 28 Jan 2026 · Local Authority Children’s Services · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western. I thank the hon. Member for Woking (Mr Forster) for securing the debate and for his powerful and heartfelt contribution. I have met him on a number of occasions, and I am sure we will continue to meet to discuss these and other related issues. I express my own deep sorrow at the tragic death of Sara Sharif. By all accounts, Sara was a bright happy girl who should have gone on to enjoy all the things in life she had ahead of her. Instead, her life was brought to a brutal and painful end by the actions of her father and stepmother. In such circumstances, it is small comfort to know that those directly responsible for Sara’s death have been brought to justice and will spend most of the rest of their lives in prison. I pay tribute to all who gave evidence that ultimately proved beyond doubt that her death was the result of lengthy and increasingly sadistic abuse. We in this place must also reflect on the fact that, as set out in the local child safeguarding practice review, there were opportunities where Sara’s appalling mistreatment could have been identified and stopped. I have already committed to write to the hon. Member for Woking, setting out the Government’s full range of actions in direct response to the recommendations of the LCSPR. I will take a moment to recognise the hon. Members who have contributed to the debate. My hon. Friend the Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) rightly praised the fantastic work of Martin Kelly and his team in turning around services in York, beyond simply looking at the Ofsted inspection results. The transformational change for children and families in that city is down to that team’s brilliant work. My hon. Friend also rightly identified the concept of safe uncertainty. As we have heard, we are trying to legislate for and resource a system that needs to act decisively when there is significant harm, and support families where there is not significant harm, but there are concerns. Getting that balance right requires practitioners to occupy a very difficult position of safe uncertainty: not knowing, but holding competing hypotheses and ideas in mind about what might be going on for a family, and doing so in a calm, methodical and skilled way. The hon. Member for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord) made a point about social work judgment, which neatly summarised that reflection. Devon’s performance is an ongoing concern—for far too many years, it has not been able to reach a level of providing good enough services for children and families. I welcome his summary of some of the progress that has been made, in particular in workforce stability. I will keep a close eye on that to ensure that we get Devon to the point where it is no longer under an intervention by the Department—but that intervention will continue for as long as necessary to get services to the place where his residents and the children he represents need them to be. Like many other hon. Members, he mentioned residential care and the concerns about profiteering, which I will return to in a moment. My hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) was absolutely right to highlight the situation in which more than 1,000 children are in care. If we were to take a step back and ask whether some of those children could have grown up with people who already loved them and could keep them safe, if we had the resources and intervention available to support the family network, I am convinced, as he is, that the answer would be yes. I welcome the spirit in which his offer was given; he has raised that offer with me before, which is not being defensive about the challenges that the city faces, but asks whether the Department will take a proactive approach in offering improvement support, doing it in a slightly different way. I confirm to him that yes, we will, and I am happy to have further conversations with him. Similarly, with Ofsted, I wish to ensure that its inspection framework and the chief inspector’s approach are totally in line with the Government reform programme. I am pleased to confirm that such work is very much under way. The hon. Member for Guildford (Zöe Franklin) wants to write to me about the situations that she raised. I am happy to look into them. She is also right to raise the crucial role of education as part of that partnership for safeguarding children. As a foster carer, my hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire Dales (John Whitby) knows better than anyone the importance of getting fostering right, so that we do not need to rely unnecessarily on residential care, with all the consequences of that. He was right to highlight the amazing work of Mockingbird constellations to support foster carers. In the coming days, I urge him to keep a close eye on any announcements that may be welcomed positively on both those fronts. The hon. Member for Dewsbury and Batley (Iqbal Mohamed) rightly highlighted the progress that has been made in Kirklees council and stressed the need to fund further reform, which is the action that the Government are taking with £2.4 billion to roll out the Families First programme. He made a point about off-rolling and children not on the school register, which I will return to directly in a moment. I join my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland (Luke Myer) in congratulating the local Labour team and the children’s social care staff there on their work to turn around those services. Like him, I want to take action to disrupt the broken care market. I encourage local partners in the Tees valley and across the whole north-east to come forward with proposals for a regional care co-operative, which the Government will certainly consider. The hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) was right to highlight the rural dimension of much of the debate. I, too, represent a rural constituency, and the way in which children’s social care is delivered needs to reflect the benefits of dispersed access to services. On the adoption and special guardianship support fund, the Government will set out very soon actions to give more certainty and improvements to that fund into the future. I shall keep Members abreast of those updates. The hon. Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe (David Chadwick) was absolutely right to highlight the improvements not just in English local authorities, but in his own Welsh constituency in Powys. He rightly highlighted the centrality of advocacy for children, in particular for those in care. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) was right to highlight the dimensions beyond just England. In fact, the UK Government have brazenly stolen Northern Ireland innovations in support of children in residential care. We look to bring the model of step-down care in fostering in Northern Ireland to the rest of the UK. I will now answer directly some of the concerns expressed by the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson). I appreciate the spirit in which she offered to work collaboratively with the Government. She highlighted a number of the issues where the Government have been listening and responding, not least with regard to the children not in school register, where we have tabled a number of amendments to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill to address the specific points around burdens for families. On funding, the hon. Lady quoted my report at me, so I will quote it back at her. I called for £2.6 billion of funding over a four-year reform programme. I am really proud to say that the Government have invested and met that and, in some cases, exceeded it. The Families First programme has received £2.4 billion on top of previous spending, and hundreds of millions of pounds will be spent to improve the care system. The job now is to make sure that that investment is spent well and has a lasting effect. I recognise the point that the hon. Lady makes about private special schools and the profit cap. We will be setting out the full range of reforms that we will be making to the special educational needs system shortly. We have heard the point that she has made on that. We have also announced £3 billion of capital spending for local authorities across England to increase special educational needs provision. Finally, the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Windsor (Jack Rankin), talked about the scope of the children not in school register. I appreciate the cross-party nature of his remarks, but it is a challenging position to occupy to say that there are too many burdens on families while also advocating for amendments to the Bill that would dramatically widen the scope of the children not in school register to more families. The Conservative amendment that he referred to, tabled in the other place, would cover all families who have ever had a child protection investigation. Under a third of those investigations identify significant harm, so it would be a significant widening of scope. I will happily have a further conversation with the hon. Member about that, but I have concerns about the scope. In the light of the time available, I will briefly summarise the specific action that the Government are taking to address concerns about the child protection system in England. It is absolutely essential that we build a more confident, decisive and expert-led child protection response that learns, not only from Sara’s appalling abuse, but from the experience of many other children who have been referenced in this debate. We need to make sure that the children not in school register closes the loopholes where families are deliberately seeking to abuse their children. We need to build, as we are, multi-agency child protection teams that bring agencies from across different services, work in lockstep with the police, health services and social care, and make those judgments with only the most expert staff in their units. We are resourcing those and rolling them out as we speak. We need to make sure that well-resourced family help provision is in place for those families. Nationally, we have just finished the consultation for the child protection authority. The national panel will be transferring to take on that function with a wider scope, in the light of Alexis Jay’s report. My ambition is to make sure that, in as many cases as possible where there is significant harm, we have a group of experts from across different services who can zoom in on that abuse and act decisively with the family court system, so that we have far fewer of these cases in the future. At a national level, my ambition is to make sure that we are able to rewire information sharing, including through the single unique identifier, so that we do not end up in that situation in the first place. I will finish by thanking the hon. Member for Woking for triggering this important debate.

• 19 Jan 2026 · Children’s Care Home Providers: Financial Oversight · Hansard source

  More

  The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill will introduce a financial oversight scheme for children’s social care. That will increase the transparency of children’s social care providers so that we can make accurate, real-time assessments of financial risk so that local authorities can step in and take swift action in the interests of children.

• 19 Jan 2026 · Children’s Care Home Providers: Financial Oversight · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the hon. Member’s interest in this issue, and the reports from the National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee. Children’s social care issues looked at through the prism of profit making in children’s homes demonstrate how much radical reform we need for children’s social care. That is why we are putting £2.4 billion into resetting the system overall so that it intervenes earlier. We will also bring forward plans very soon to set out an expansion of fostering. That is in addition to measures in the Bill that is currently going through the other place to introduce a financial oversight mechanism and a profit cap to address the issues that the hon. Member has mentioned.

• 19 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I share some of those concerns; this is an important issue. I have asked officials to meet the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman to better understand the issues in the current complaints process, and I would be happy to meet the hon. Lady. Separately, we will soon publish updated statutory guidance on advocacy services for children. The points the hon. Lady raised are important.

• 19 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I compliment my hon. Friend’s local leadership in High Peak. To support our ambition of 50,000 more young people into apprenticeships, we are expanding foundation apprenticeships, launching a £140 million pilot with mayors to better connect young people with local apprenticeships, and fully funding small and medium-sized enterprises to deliver apprenticeships for eligible 16 to 24-year-olds.

• 19 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The hospitality industry is hugely important. Nothing has been decided on defunding apprenticeships yet. I recognise all my hon. Friend’s points, and we share her ambition that the apprenticeship system in the future is entirely designed around progression, as well as one-off learning.

• 19 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend has been leading local efforts on this issue, for which I pay tribute to him. The Government stand ready to support local higher education institutions where challenges are present, and I will of course extend the offer to continue that support, as will my noble Friend the Minister for Skills. The Office for Students has responsibility for ensuring that such transitions are managed carefully.

• 19 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for raising that important point. The Government are focused on protecting support and increasing it for those who need it most, which is why we are increasing loans in line with inflation, reintroducing maintenance grants and, crucially—something I am very proud of and which the Secretary of State recently announced—giving care-experienced students automatic access to the full loan entitlement.

• 19 Jan 2026 · A-level and T-level Enrolments · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the right hon. Member for his read-out of the discussion that took place during the most recent shadow Cabinet meeting, where this was a lively topic of debate. Britain is not broken; it has huge and deep potential, best found in our children. We were pleased to see the last Conservative Government take forward many of the reforms initiated under the last Labour Government, and this Labour Government will be doubling down on the measures that are needed to break down barriers to opportunity at every stage.

• 19 Jan 2026 · A-level and T-level Enrolments · Hansard source

  More

  More than 260,000 state-funded pupils took at least one A-level in the summer of 2025, and we expect that to remain steady in the future. T-levels continue to grow: at the last count more than 25,000 students embarked on them, which represents an increase of nearly 60% on the previous year’s figure. We are committed to offering post-16 students even more choice through V-levels, a new vocational qualification sitting alongside A-levels and T-levels.

• 19 Jan 2026 · A-level and T-level Enrolments · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for his leadership on these issues through the all-party parliamentary group on sixth form education, and for his local leadership as a constituency MP. I can reassure him that we will manage the transition carefully as these changes are introduced. We stand behind T-levels, which are a good option for many students, and we want to see the numbers increase. We have run a consultation which has now closed, and we are analysing the responses to ensure that all students experience a smooth transition.

• 13 Jan 2026 · Universities: Statutory Duty of Care · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for highlighting that. I welcome his intervention, given that he has not had a chance to mention Kieran’s story and Manjo’s experience as his mum in a speech. We want to move fast, which is why we published updated terms of reference for the taskforce just last month. They set out the priorities for the taskforce for the next phase of work, which includes exploring the most effective mechanisms for holding the sector to account. We have also recently appointed Professor Sir Steve West as the new higher education student support champion, to maintain momentum on these matters. Sir Steve will steer the taskforce through the next phase of work. Although universities play an important role in creating supportive environments, they are not, and should not become, substitute mental health services. Mental health care rightly sits with the NHS. The Government recognise that and the pressures on services, which is why we are recruiting 8,500 additional NHS mental health staff by the end of this Parliament. As my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East highlighted, many universities are already delivering to bridge the gap, providing counselling, wellbeing services and crisis support, while working closely with local health partners to ensure that students get the right care. The taskforce will shortly publish a report showcasing five successful higher education and NHS partnerships. Those examples will demonstrate how greater collaboration can transform support for students while helping to drive efficiencies across health services. I urge universities that are not already part of such partnerships to study those models and explore how they can forge an approach that works for their local context. To stress it again: the taskforce is looking at how to better hold institutions to account and will make recommendations accordingly.

• 13 Jan 2026 · Universities: Statutory Duty of Care · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Christopher. I recognise the profound pain felt by families who have lost loved ones in higher education. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) for securing this debate, and I pay tribute to his constituents Bob and Maggie Abrahart, whose tireless work for better student support has inspired so many. I want to acknowledge all the families who have campaigned with courage and determination, including those from the LEARN Network—Lived Experience for Action Right Now—who continue to work alongside us to drive change. Our duty now is clear: we must turn grief into learning and action. The Government share the determination to do just that. We want safer campuses and better support for every student. Our approach is to act on the evidence and work with the sector to embed best practice and strengthen institutional accountability. Members should be in no doubt that this Government believe that change in that regard is needed. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Ynys Môn (Llinos Medi), who highlighted Mared’s story: the tragic loss of the life of someone who had a bright future as a pharmacist ahead of them. My hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge) highlighted Oskar’s story. I recognise that improvement in higher education is needed. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) highlighted the UK-wide nature of these concerns and the growing prevalence of mental health conditions. My hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton West (Warinder Juss) raised important issues about general duties, to which I will turn later. My hon. Friend the Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) highlighted the link to the cost of living pressures that many students face, and the issues for international students. My hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes) spoke about the tragic stories of Paul, Callum and Alec, and highlighted the really good practice taking place at Bournemouth University, which is part of the answer to what needs to change. My hon. Friend the Member for City of Durham (Mary Kelly Foy) highlighted the brilliant work of the Unite Foundation, which I know well, and spoke about cohorts such as care-experienced students and estranged students. My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) rightly highlighted governance concerns and the centrality of accountability. The Government remain committed to improving students’ health and wellbeing. Since the previous debate on this matter, we have published the findings from the national review of higher education student suicides. That landmark review examined serious incident and prevention of future deaths reports, identified patterns and risk factors, and looked at institutional responses in depth. The sector’s response was notable. Many universities engaged openly and honestly, showing a clear commitment to share lessons and learn together. To ensure that the review’s recommendations are turned into action, we have extended the higher education mental health implementation taskforce, which brings together students, families and the sector to work with and challenge institutions to improve student mental health and wellbeing services.

• 13 Jan 2026 · Universities: Statutory Duty of Care · Hansard source

  More

  The taskforce’s job is to look at the whole system that sits around universities, and the OfS is a crucial part of that, so it will be in scope of that work. Let me turn to the question of a statutory duty of care. As has been highlighted in this debate, higher education providers have a general duty of care to deliver educational and pastoral services to the standard of an ordinary competent institution. In carrying out those duties, they are expected to act reasonably. In addition to general and common-law duties, universities also have explicit statutory obligations. For instance, under the Equality Act, they must make reasonable adjustments for disabled students, which includes those with qualifying mental health conditions. Providers should plan ahead to remove barriers and act promptly when there are signs of mental health deterioration. Equality and Human Rights Commission guidance makes clear what good practice looks like. Student-facing staff should be trained to recognise signs of mental health crisis or deterioration and should know what steps to take, including helping the student to access support. Where a severe or urgent condition is apparent, reasonable adjustments should be made without waiting for a formal diagnosis or medical evidence. If a student has no diagnosis but staff are concerned, for example because of disengagement, missed deadlines or marked changes in behaviour, staff should consider whether the Equality Act criteria may be met and whether adjustments are appropriate. We also need to be clear about what introducing a statutory duty would mean in practice. It is not just a question of drafting; it would require defining a minimum legal standard for universities, which risks becoming a ceiling rather than a floor. I draw Members’ attention to some of the evidence provided in the 2023 Petitions Committee hearing on a statutory duty of care, at which a number of stakeholders expressed a range of concerns and scepticism about the unintended effects of a statutory duty of care. A ceiling rather than a floor could drive providers towards defensive compliance and litigation, instead of focusing on what really matters: spotting problems early, making timely adjustments and learning from serious incidents. When we talk about the risk of unintended consequences, this is what we mean: confusion about boundaries, reduced ambition and the risk of resources being diverted from proactive support. Almost all students are adults. Introducing a special statutory duty for them could be disproportionate, when the evidence shows that students in higher education have a lower suicide rate than others of the same age in the general population. That is not to minimise the problem at universities, which I recognise, but to highlight the need for a proportionate response that strikes the right balance. We will continue to monitor the evidence, listen deeply to bereaved families and hold providers to account. Right now, the fastest and most effective route to support safer campuses is for universities to embed the recommendations from the national review and best practice identified through the taskforce’s outputs, to strengthen their partnerships with local health services and to ensure full compliance with duties that already exist. Together, I believe we can ensure that higher education remains a place of opportunity, enrichment and safety for every student. I know that those views are wholly shared by my noble Friend Baroness Smith, the Minister for Skills.

• 12 Jan 2026 · Higher Education: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  I would like to express my gratitude to my hon. Friend the Member for Southend East and Rochford (Mr Alaba) for securing the debate. He has a dedicated record of 15 years of service as a youth mentor, and has worked as a school governor, overseeing the education of young people, so he provides an invaluable perspective on these matters, and particularly on the transition to higher education. I also note the contribution and efforts of my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West and Leigh (David Burton-Sampson) on this matter. The work of both Southend Members in supporting students in their area demonstrates their clear commitment to the principle that education must be the primary engine for breaking down barriers to opportunity. This Government share that ambition and are focused on delivering the structural changes required to make it a reality. I was personally struck by the remarks of my hon. Friend the Member for Southend East and Rochford on Second Reading of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill; he stated that his constituency is a “proud coastal community” that has too often been “left behind when it comes to connectivity, educational outcomes and investment in skills.” —[ Official Report , 2 September 2025; Vol. 772, c. 185.] Our post-16 education and skills White Paper sets out our vision for a world-leading skills system that breaks down barriers. We are determined to ensure that, as my hon. Friend said, “Where someone lives should not negatively impact their future.” —[ Official Report , 20 March 2025; Vol. 764, c. 597.] Our skills White Paper provides the blueprint for delivering the Prime Minister’s new target of two thirds of young people participating in higher-level learning—academic, technical or apprenticeships—by age 25, up from 50% today. But we can only deliver this by putting the sector on a secure financial footing. That is why we will increase tuition fee caps for all higher education providers in line with forecast inflation in academic years 2026-27 and 2027-28. We will then legislate, when parliamentary time allows, to increase caps automatically for future academic years. That is crucial for getting to the root of some of the challenges that our higher education institutions face regarding sustainability. This increased investment must be matched by a commitment to excellence. We will make future fee uplifts conditional on higher education providers achieving a higher quality threshold under the Office for Students’ quality regime, and will restrict fee income where that cannot be demonstrated. That will protect taxpayers’ investment and reward providers for higher quality. We are also committed to supporting the aspirations of every person who meets the requirements and wants to attend higher education. We will introduce targeted means-tested maintenance grants of up to £1,000 a year from academic year 2028-29, providing vital extra support for students from low-income households without increasing their debt. Those grants will be funded by the introduction of a levy on income from international students. To help students from the most disadvantaged backgrounds, we will future-proof financial support by increasing maintenance loans in line with forecast inflation every academic year. Furthermore, I am particularly proud that we will provide extra support for care leavers, who will automatically become eligible to receive the maximum rate of maintenance loan from academic year 2026-27. I am aware of the concerns raised about the University of Essex’s decision regarding its Southend campus, and I assure my hon. Friends that the Department is working closely with the Office for Students, the university and local partners to understand the effect on students, and to secure practical options. The Department’s priority is to protect students’ interests by ensuring continuity of study, and access to clear information, support and practical options. When a campus closes, providers are expected to act in the best interests of students, including by enabling transfers, where that is a student’s choice. Hon. Members rightly expect good-quality communication from the institution about how the change is implemented. The change should support improved value for money for all, and should be backed by a stronger focus on increasing participation for disadvantaged learners. My hon. Friends the Members for Southend East and Rochford, and for Southend West and Leigh, have spoken directly with my noble Friend the Minister for Skills, and have been working proactively with Ministers in the Department of Health and Social Care, NHS England, and local partners. My hon. Friends’ local leadership on seeking early local collaboration will play a vital part in minimising disruption for students. My Department will continue to work closely with the Office for Students, the university and others in the area, including Members of Parliament, as the situation relating to the University of Essex develops. I thank my hon. Friends the Members for Southend East and Rochford, and for Southend West and Leigh, for their continued championing of the needs of local students, and reassure them that the Government will support their efforts to manage campus changes in a way that minimises disruption for students and ensures that the area has a bright future. Question put and agreed to.

• 5 Jan 2026 · Length of the School Week · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. Happy new year to one and all. I congratulate the young person who started this petition for securing this debate; it is always good to see pupils actively involved in thinking about the world around them and campaigning for the change that they want to see. I started my career as a secondary school citizenship teacher, so I welcome seeing young people using the instruments of their democracy in such a way. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson) for opening the debate. High and rising standards are at the heart of this Government’s mission to break down barriers to opportunity at every stage. Schools in England have made excellent progress in recent years and our brilliant teachers provide high-quality education to millions of children. The success of new freedoms and responsibilities for schools, starting with the city academies programme in the 2000s, our new-found discipline in the pursuit of evidence in the education system in England and the professional development that means we now have the most expert teaching workforce ever have all been hard fought for and are now delivering real results for children. Although I understand why a four-day school week would appeal to some, it is essential that we do not compromise the great progress that has been made over recent years by reducing the amount of time that pupils spend at school, either in total or spread over a five-day week. Evidence, including research by the Education Policy Institute published in 2024, has shown that additional time in school, when used effectively, can have a positive impact on pupil attainment, particularly for the most vulnerable. Schools need enough time to deliver the curriculum to a high standard while ensuring appropriate breaks and opportunities for wider enrichment. Shortening the school week would upset that balance, making it harder for pupils to secure the knowledge and skills they need to go on to lead rich and fulfilling lives. Compressing more hours into fewer days would squeeze out valuable time for school clubs, sport or homework. For those reasons, the Government have recently restated our commitment to all state-funded mainstream schools delivering a minimum school week of 32.5 hours. Meeting that expectation is essential to delivering fairness and high standards for every child. Our published guidance encourages schools to consider extending their hours beyond the minimum and focus on how that time can best support pupil development and deliver school priorities. Reducing time spent in school risks having the opposite effect. High-quality time in school is about far more than being in lessons: it is also about creating opportunities for social interaction, enrichment and personal growth. As well as supporting academic achievement, a broad and balanced education plays a vital role in supporting the mental health and wellbeing of children and young people; being in school across the working week ensures that they benefit from the full range of support that a high-quality education offers to help them thrive. Insisting on schools being open and educating pupils five days a week should not negate the importance of testing new approaches to embedding flexible working practices for teachers. In fact, expanding and promoting flexible working opportunities in schools can help to recruit, retain and motivate teachers, as a number of Members have mentioned. There are many positive examples of schools embracing flexible working policies for teachers and the freedom that comes with that. Dixons Academies Trust offers a nine-day fortnight for all teachers without impacting pupil contact time; it achieves that through innovative methods in large group teaching and by using its senior leadership team in different ways. The results look very encouraging. My Department is also backing 10 ambassador schools across the country to test and share the best flexible working approaches and solutions. Teacher workloads have been a challenge for schools, too often leading to high rates of teacher turnover. That is why it is so positive to see teachers working fewer hours now than in recent years according to the most recent working lives survey, which was published in November. There is certainly more work to do to ensure that teaching is a balanced and achievable long-term career, but positive progress is being made, as it is on retention and recruitment. However, that is probably a subject for a longer and separate Westminster Hall debate. To conclude, reducing the school week would undermine pupil learning and development, and place unnecessary strain on working families. High standards, equal access and sufficient time in school are essential if we are to deliver on our commitment to give every child the opportunity to achieve and thrive. That is why this Government stand firmly by the principle of a minimum 32.5-hour school week delivered across five days, which ensures consistency, fairness and opportunity for every child in this country. Considering the wider benefits of time in school, I am afraid to say that the Government therefore have no plans to reduce the school week from five to four days, but I thank all the petitioners for engaging in this process so fully, and thank my colleagues from across the House for contributing to the debate.

• 8 Dec 2025 · Self-employed Adoptive Parents: Statutory Support · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for those questions. I will directly answer the questions that the hon. Member for South West Devon asked in a moment, but I take the broader point about encouraging local authorities to ensure that adopters in their area are aware of the support available to them. As I was saying, local authorities can consider making a payment that is equivalent to the maternity allowance. That allows authorities to target adopters most in need of financial support, though I take the hon. Member’s point—a point powerfully made—on the inconsistency of that offer across England at the moment. To answer the hon. Member’s questions directly, first, the parental leave review started in July and is expected to last 18 months, so we should be able to work back from there on when we expect its conclusions and publication. The review has a wide scope, but specific work on adoption support is firmly within that scope. Finally, I turn to broader adoption support, which the hon. Member also asked me about. The Department for Education does make wider support available for all adoptive families. This year, £50 million was made available to support adopters and adoptive families through the adoption and special guardianship support fund. I appreciate that the changes we made to the ASGSF in April have been very difficult for some families, and I have listened carefully to what families have told me about those changes. I speak regularly with adopters and those working in the adoption system. We will start a formal process of engagement on long-term decisions in the new year. Details of the ASGSF from April 2026 will be made available once departmental business planning decisions are completed, and I expect that to be very soon. So far this year, we have approved applications to support over 14,000 families through the fund. We have also invested £8.8 million this year into Adoption England for services across the country. Adoption England is doing a huge range of work to develop support for families through regional adoption agencies—for example, a new core offer of support for the first 12 to 18 months of a match between a child and a family. Fundamentally, beyond adoption leave, the Government are taking bold steps to transform the entire children’s social care system. That is set out in our recently announced Families First Partnership programme. We have upped the funding to take it to £2.4 billion over the next three years. That change is fundamental to the whole system because it will reset the system—in a way that many Members across the House have for years argued for—away from late-stage crisis intervention and towards earlier, more intensive support for families, of all shapes and sizes, and that should be the bedrock of the future children’s social care system. In parallel, the investment and changes going into the NHS to ensure that health services can respond to the mental health needs of families and children—particularly the most vulnerable—will also act as a bedrock. We recognise, however, that adoptive families have special support needs. I thank the hon. Member for South West Devon for securing the debate and for her speech. I welcome her acknowledgment of the difference that adopters make across the country. I also welcome the attention of the parental pay and leave review to this area of work. I look forward to engaging in the new year with adopters and Members from across the House, as well as with stakeholders who work in the adoption system, including my Department’s adopter reference group, as we work to confirm the long-term arrangements for adoption support. Question put and agreed to.