Westminster Hall

Thursday 26th February 2026 Westminster Hall

Thursday 26 February 2026

[Valerie Vaz in the Chair]

Backbench Business

Thursday 26th February 2026 Westminster Hall

Eating Disorders Awareness Week

Thursday 26th February 2026 Westminster Hall

13:30

[Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD) [R]]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered Eating Disorders Awareness Week 2026.

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Vaz. This year, Eating Disorders Awareness Week is centred on the theme of community. Over the past six years, as chair of the eating disorders all-party parliamentary group, I have witnessed the power of community at first hand. Our APPG has grown into a determined group of MPs, campaigners, clinicians, researchers, families and, crucially, people with lived experience. I thank my colleagues across the House who continue to work constructively on this issue. I also pay tribute to Hope Virgo, our tireless secretariat, who has turned lived experience into sustained strategic campaigning. Of course, I also thank Beat, the eating disorder charity, without whose tireless campaigning Eating Disorder Awareness Week would not even come before this Parliament.

Despite the tireless campaigning and the greater awareness of this tragic illness, however, I must confess to deep frustration. Over those six years, things have not improved; they have worsened. The number of children and young people treated for eating disorders has risen by around two fifths since the pandemic. The 2019 health survey for England found that the proportion of adults with a likely eating disorder had risen from about 6% in 2007 to 16% in 2019.

Adults in England wait up to 700 days, almost two years, just to start treatment. Not only are we failing to treat people quickly enough; too often we fail to identify them at all. Of the estimated 360,000 children and young people affected, only about 55,000 were identified by GPs in 2020, and even fewer accessed specialist care. Only a fraction of adults receive a formal diagnosis. That is the devastating reality facing eating disorder sufferers across the country.

Our APPG is therefore calling on the Government to introduce a dedicated national eating disorder strategy. At the last debate on this issue in September, the Minister for Care expressed concern about a “proliferation” of documents and strategies. He said that he was “not convinced” that adding stand-alone strategies alongside guidance and plans would improve outcomes. Eating disorders are among the most complex and deadly mental health conditions. If ever there was a case for a dedicated cross-departmental strategy, this is it. Without a unified strategy, we are left with fragmented guidance and piecemeal reform that fail to match the scale and seriousness of the challenge. I repeat our call today: it is time for a dedicated national eating disorder strategy.

When we think of community, we often think of our friends, neighbours and colleagues, but for many young people, community is no longer primarily physical; it is digital, and the community that they encounter online often reinforces their problems rather than helping them to recover. Platforms are saturated with pro-eating disorder content. That includes misleading nutritional advice and distorted body image ideals. One alarming trend is in so-called recovery accounts: rather than providing helpful advice to sufferers, they often share tips on hiding behaviours from staff or how to minimise meals.

Research by the Centre for Countering Digital Hate reveals something deeply concerning. When researchers created simulated 13-year-old users on YouTube, the platform’s algorithm recommended harmful eating disorder content in one out of every four videos they watched—one in four. But it gets worse: when these harmful videos were reported, nearly three quarters of them were not removed. Even after being flagged, most of this dangerous content stayed online. This is not simply about individual users; it is about algorithms amplifying harm. A single pause on a video can trigger a stream of increasingly harmful material. Even when users block accounts or report content, similar posts rapidly reappear under a new hashtag.

In September, the Minister for Care rightly acknowledged that the Government must address the underlying drivers behind the rise in eating disorders, including the online environment. I welcome that recognition, but I am concerned that he pointed to the Online Safety Act 2023 as an example of how this can be addressed. After the global ban of #SkinnyTok, new hashtags emerged almost immediately, after which the same harmful content was posted. We must focus on the algorithms that amplify harmful content. Through Ofcom, the Government must hold social media giants to account when their platforms repeatedly allow harmful content to circulate. Relying on the victims of such content to report continuously and become the regulators cannot be right.

If there is one lesson that the APPG has learnt over six years, it is that eating disorders are profoundly misunderstood, and that misunderstanding costs lives. Early warning signs are often missed, leaving families to navigate complex and frightening conditions without guidance or support. That lack of training translates directly into delayed recognition, unsafe discharge decisions and prolonged suffering. In 2017, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman warned of avoidable death and systemic failings in NHS eating disorder services. It called for improved training, better co-ordination and cross-organisational learning. Nine years later, we are still seeing the same failures.

Across England, many of the specialist community eating disorder teams lack a consultant psychiatrist. Vacancy rates for consultant posts remain high. There is guidance available, such as the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ medical emergencies in eating disorders guidance, but it is inconsistently applied. Where training is offered, it is patchy, inconsistent and too often voluntary.

Last year, I was contacted by the family of Ruby Hamill, a young woman with a history of severe anorexia nervosa. While held on remand at HMP New Hall, she collapsed after being unable to eat for almost a month. Despite her known history of anorexia, she received no eating disorder treatment in prison. She was later treated for refeeding syndrome, a life-threatening complication, after being granted humanitarian bail. Thankfully, Ruby survived, but she nearly died in the care of the state due to an absence of clear, mandatory standards and properly trained staff.

Frontline staff need practical, evidence-based training. They must be able to recognise early warning signs and know how to ask sensitive questions, communicate without reinforcing harmful thinking and escalate concerns safely. Proper training saves lives. If we are serious about tackling this crisis, we must equip frontline staff with the skills and knowledge they need to help people effectively.

Training alone, however, is not enough. Even the most skilled professionals cannot protect patients within a system that lacks clear, enforceable standards on timely access to care. For children and young people, there is a waiting time standard—95% of urgent cases seen within one week, and routine cases within four weeks—yet that is not consistently met. For adults, there is no waiting time standard at all. Recent data shows that median waits are 42 days, with some waiting many months, even more than a year, for assessment or treatment. During that time, physical health deteriorates and hospital admissions become more likely.

Access to quality care is a postcode lottery. Only one in six integrated care systems currently provide sufficient intensive community or day treatment for both children and adults. I welcome the commitment to expand intensive community and day services, but we must not allow community care to be a pretext for the erosion of specialist in-patient units. Specialist in-patient services stabilise those who are critically unwell. They offer a range of expertise that community teams cannot always replicate. Yet we do not currently have enough specialist beds for the acute level of need that exists.

At the same time, our research has found some deeply concerning discharge practices. Recent freedom of information requests to all trusts across the UK found that people with eating disorders are often being discharged with a BMI of under 15, and in some cases far lower. I am concerned that we are discharging patients who are medically unsafe simply because beds are scarce. If community and day services are to succeed, they must be properly funded and able to intervene early, so that everyone can receive quality care closer to their home. When people receive timely and evidence-based support, the need for intensive in-patient or day treatment can fall by around a third. That reduces risks for patients and long-term pressures on NHS services.

We cannot solve this crisis by shifting care around the system. We must build capacity across the whole pathway—early intervention, community provision and specialist in-patient care—so that access is determined by need, not postcode.

In October last year, our APPG published a report on preventing deaths related to eating disorders. It made for harrowing reading. Although some areas of the UK showcased pockets of good practice, the evidence is clear that unsafe discharges are still far too common and that the system fails to prevent avoidable deaths. People with anorexia are five to six times more likely to die—through physical complications, or suicide—than the general population.

In many cases, deaths from eating disorders are misrecorded or omitted from death certificates, with death instead being attributed to organ failure or suicide. As a result, we do not even have exact statistics for eating disorder deaths, which means the true scale of the crisis remains unclear. If we cannot even accurately record how many people are dying from these illnesses—these eating disorders—how can we possibly begin to address the scale of the problem?

The APPG has repeatedly called for a confidential inquiry into eating disorder deaths, which would be similar to the inquiries into maternal deaths that already exist, so that patterns can be identified and lessons learned. We know what we need to do. We have a strategy planned and—through the APPG—we have experts who are willing to support this work.

In September last year, I asked for a follow-up on what the Department is doing to ensure that eating disorder deaths are recorded accurately on death certificates. I was promised an update from the Minister for Women’s Health and Mental Health on progress in this area. I waited for weeks. It was only after I raised the matter in the main Chamber that I eventually received a written response, which stated that the issue did not lie with the Department of Health and Social Care but with the Ministry of Justice, and that I would be contacted shortly. Why did it take weeks to give me that information? That was in November, and I am still waiting. I still have not heard from the Ministry of Justice.

I appreciate that Ministers face competing pressures, but this issue is about accurately recording avoidable deaths. It should not require repeated parliamentary interventions for an MP to finally receive an answer to their question. I ask the Minister in Westminster Hall today: when can I expect an answer and when will families receive the transparency they deserve?

In 2020, it was estimated that eating disorders cost the UK £9.4 billion annually. That is just the cost for the NHS. It is not the full cost of what eating disorders cost us as a society, including the cost to life and to family, and the stress caused by someone waiting years and years for treatment, or being finally treated successfully, if they are treated at all.

Between 2015 and 2019, however, research into eating disorders received only around 1% of UK mental health research funding. We are spending billions on managing the consequences of this problem, while investing only a fraction of that amount in understanding the causes and improving treatments. We cannot reduce long-term costs if we continue to under-invest in research. In line with the Government’s focus on early intervention and prevention, the current situation must change.

The eating disorder community is strong, passionate and determined. Our goal is to grow the community beyond those who are already engaged with it, to reach those who do not yet recognise the symptoms, and to engage those who think that eating disorders are “someone else’s issue”, because they are not. No one should be dying of an eating disorder in 2026. No parent should be forced to fight the system while fighting for their child’s life. No person should be told that they are “not ill enough” to deserve care.

We need a dedicated national eating disorder strategy. We need sustained and proportionate research funding. We need mandatory workforce training. We need a waiting time standard for adults. We need accurate death recording and a confidential inquiry into all eating disorder-related deaths. We also need stronger online regulations. We know what needs to change, and the APPG stands ready to work constructively with Ministers to deliver it. There is no time to waste.

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

Order. If anyone requires any assistance during the course of this debate, please see the Doorkeeper.

13:39

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is, as always, a special pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. You always seem to do the Thursday afternoon debates and, by and large, I seem to be here too—but that is by the way. Some might say, “Well, where else would you find him?” But there we are.

It is a real pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse). In the time the hon. Lady has been here, she has been very much a hard advocate on this issue. Every one of us recognises her commitment and leadership on this matter. I put on the record my thanks to her for what she has done, what she continues to do and, indeed, if God spares her, what she will do in the future as well. It is really important.

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

Order. Can I ask the hon. Gentleman to speak up a little? I think people in the Public Gallery cannot really hear.

[Jim Shannon]

Of course. I do not think I need to do the introduction again; I will leave it at that.

I want to tell a story—the hon. Member for Bath already knows it—about one of my constituents. I was elected in 2010, and in 2012 two of my constituents, a mum and a dad, came to see me about their daughter. They were both police officers and I knew them extremely well; I knew them through a friendship we had outside the police, but also because they were officers I would contact as an elected representative. Their daughter— I am not going to mention her name, nor theirs—had severe bulimia. She was a lovely looking young girl, by the way, and very bright, but she had a real problem.

This is the true story of that family’s journey. They came to me worried sick about what was going to happen with their daughter, what they could do and what could be done. Along with them, I approached the Health Minister in Northern Ireland at that time—Edwin Poots, my party colleague—and told him the story. We did not have anything in Northern Ireland to address issues relating to eating disorders, so we had to come here to do that. I remember meeting the parents in Central Lobby in 2012, and them telling me that the Minister in Northern Ireland, Edwin Poots, had been able to transfer that young lady to St Thomas’ hospital—just across the river—to get the help that that young lady needed.

It is a transformational story, because by doing that, they saved that young girl’s life—and they did not just save her life. I know her well. One day, I was canvassing down in Millisle at the edge of my constituency. I knocked on the door and there she was, with two young children. That intervention by the Health Minister in Northern Ireland helped to save her life and to give her a life for the future. It is an example of what can be done if everyone works together to ensure that things go the right way. I will also say unashamedly that, while it was down to the NHS intervention, the prayers of God’s people undoubtedly saved that young girl’s life as well.

I want to discuss the situation in Northern Ireland. I gave that example because it shows how we worked in Northern Ireland and with the health service here to give that young lady the support to start her life, which ultimately led to her husband and then her children. Official figures show that people referred for eating disorder support in some areas face significant waiting times, with people experiencing delays as part of broader pressures on mental health services.

The hon. Member for Bath referred in her speech to mental health issues; those are some of the things we have to try to overcome collectively. In addition, mental health waiting times have been deemed unacceptable, and there has been a failure to publish comprehensive waiting-time data. I do not think there are many debates where the issue of data is as important as it is in health. The data tells us the direction we need to go in and gives us the evidence to put together a programme of response, and to find a better way of doing things. There has been a failure to publish waiting time data for child and adolescent mental health services, which is critical in supporting young people—more often than not, it is young people who suffer.

I also want to raise the impact of social media on people who suffer with eating disorders. In the last year we have seen a drastic rise in advertising related to weight-loss jabs. It is fair to say that they are easy to get and use, they are somewhat affordable, and they offer a quick fix or change. Although the premise of weight-loss injections is good, and the intention is to get people to a healthy weight, for those with eating disorders they have the potential to undermine awareness of healthy nutrition, exercise and mental health support. It is important that they are not seen as another way to try to get that perfect body, if I can use that terminology.

Social media can be toxic enough, and I worry very much about the young girl who is struggling with the likes of anorexia or bulimia, who idolises the “perfect body” achieved through weight jabs and so on, and who almost dies trying to get there. Is there any control over who can access weight-loss jobs? Can we get a better idea of their intentions, or of some of their problems? Many advertisements do not adequately convey the medical risks, the contradictions or the need for supervision, leaving vulnerable users to try treatments unsafely. Those with eating disorders may misinterpret ads as offering a safe method to lose weight quite quickly, thereby increasing the risk of physical and mental health complications.

Eating Disorders Awareness Week, which the hon. Member for Bath has kindly given us the chance to participate in with this debate, reminds us that behind every statistic is a person. I gave the example of the young person I knew, and their success story; there are many other successes, but sometimes, with sadness, we recall those people who do not make it. In Northern Ireland, long waiting times, limited specialist services and rising demand mean that too many people are not getting help when they need it most. At the same time, toxic social media content and the relentless pressure to conform to unrealistic body ideals are fuelling anxiety, low self-esteem and harmful behaviours, particularly among young people.

Throughout the time I have got to know him, the Minister has always been very responsive to our requests in these debates. There is a lot of pressure across all of the United Kingdom in respect of anorexia and bulimia. Has the Minister had a chance, in the short time he has been in post, to have a discussion with the Health Minister back in Northern Ireland, Mike Nesbitt, about how we can better work together to try to address these issues? I am conscious that most of the treatment probably happens here; some of it can be done in Northern Ireland, but services there cannot catch and keep up with the level of problems. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s commitment to ensuring that those who are struggling can access the support they need, both here and further afield in my own Northern Ireland.

13:53

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

You will not be surprised to hear that it is a pleasure to serve under you in the Chair, Ms Vaz.

I thank the hon. Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) for the way she introduced the debate and for her leadership of the APPG on eating disorders. I join her in thanking Hope Virgo for all the work that she does. In many ways, eating disorders can be a hidden condition—even a secretive condition—but Hope really does give the topic the publicity that otherwise it would not get. Hope has been through a lot, and I would not wish what she has been through on anyone, but we are lucky that she is the campaigner she is.

[Wera Hobhouse]

It is also worth mentioning the many people who have come forward to bravely tell their stories, raise awareness and take away the stigma. We know how much courage it takes to come forward. I want to collectively thank everybody who does that. We need more people to come forward and talk about their experiences, but I thank everybody who has come forward.

[Dr Arthur]

Absolutely. I do not attend the APPG as much as I should, but when I do people tell amazingly personal stories about what has happened to them, not only as survivors but as people who have lost loved ones. It can be very emotional for people, but it is important that we share the stories and experiences. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West (Mr Quigley), because he has been a fantastic champion in the House of Commons. I am surprised that he is not here, but I expect he has a good reason. Maybe he is watching.

I want to focus on the role of community. We are trying through the APPG to create a sense of community. We all accept that proper community support is hugely beneficial to those with mental health issues generally. Through my membership of the APPG, and my work as an MP more widely, I have become much better informed about what community looks like for those with eating disorders. The support of a community, whether it be family, friends, school or a support organisation, is a wonderful thing for anyone struggling with their mental health. It is so often the first support network that someone will reach out to, and families and friends are there to catch their loved ones in the most difficult times.

Community care is often the best approach to eating disorder care. Beat’s “There’s No Place Like Home” report highlights the importance of expanding access to intensive community and day treatment for eating disorders. In many cases, it could be a lifeline for those struggling, allowing them to access a support network nearby, rather than being sent to treatment facilities sometimes hundreds of miles from their homes. However, effective community care can seem a long way off when the existing services for eating disorder treatments are so stretched right across the UK.

I want to talk a little bit about Scotland, given that my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South West (Dr Ahmed) is the Minister. The crisis in young people’s mental healthcare in Scotland is acute. CAMHS in Scotland are overwhelmed, and constituents contact me every week about their difficulties accessing services. My staff have to tell me to be careful not to raise people’s expectations, because the service is so overwhelmed. I have met staff who work in CAMHS and they are working so hard. I pay absolute tribute to them. They just need more resources.

I spoke to the chief executive of NHS Lothian specifically about the support for people with eating disorders, and she was very frank. She had just come into post and said that she thought the service was at the absolute minimum acceptable level. Perhaps I should not have welcomed that, but I did, because the starting point for fixing a broken system is to accept that it is not working. I welcome the fact that she did not try to gloss over it.

[Wera Hobhouse]

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that another big consideration is the mental health toll on people who work in eating disorder services and know that they cannot provide an adequate service to the many people who suffer? What are we doing for the people who work in these services and who want to do the best they can but simply cannot because of a lack of resources?

[Dr Arthur]

The workforce plan is key to resolving that, although I do not know an area in the NHS that has too many staff and wants to redistribute them. It is a huge challenge and we have to address it. Again, the starting point is to acknowledge that there is an issue and offer staff support where we where we can.

I raised this issue with NHS Lothian’s chief executive because—this was partly me exploiting my position— I had a close family member who had been dealing with an eating disorder. She was given an appointment to meet the service, and I was so frustrated, because it was months and months into the future. I waited patiently— I am a patient person—and my hope built up and up as we got closer to that day, but when we reached it, and my loved one went to the appointment, it was merely an assessment of whether a person needed proper support. I felt completely deflated. Hopefully, people are not still going through that.

In these times of crisis, it is all too often communities and families who are left to step up to provide what care they can. I have met parents in my constituency who are doing their absolute best for their children. I met one woman—another anecdote, I am afraid, Ms Vaz—who told me that her daughter was so weak that she had to phone an ambulance to take her to hospital. When her daughter arrived at the hospital, the medics said she was too weak to be removed from the ambulance and had to treat her there. The nature of the condition can often be secretive and very hidden until it is—hopefully not—too late.

Parents doing their absolute best is not enough, and professional medical help is required. Both the UK Government and the Scottish Government must go further to ensure that treatment is more readily accessible for those who can no longer rely solely on the support of their loved ones—I will come back to that. However, when considering the idea of community around eating disorders, we must also consider the online world and its ability to create a space for more dangerous communities.

Pro-eating disorder content, as referred to by the hon. Member for Bath, exists across the internet, from independent forums to social media sites that we all use daily. Those groups or posts provide “thinspiration” and tips on how someone can starve themselves or make themselves throw up. They glamorise the awful illness that eating disorders are, introducing them to previously well children and young people who might not have considered them, exaggerating conditions and sometimes normalising them.

This became particularly concerning during the pandemic, where we also saw a massive growth in eating disorders among the male population, as many young people were left isolated from their peers, turning to online communities. Instead of support, all too often they found content that damaged their mental health and isolated them further from the people around them. It is hard to understand just how disturbingly common such content is. Figures from April 2025 show that more than a quarter of young people have been exposed to eating disorder content online, which is likely an underestimation. That sits alongside the one third of children who have seen self-harm and suicide content online.

Social media sites are feeding young people this content from a never-ending algorithm, which we also heard about from the hon. Member for Bath. More children are likely to consume the content because of social media and its algorithms. The more they continue to see such content, the more they consume it, and the more they consume it, the more they continue to see it, creating a greater relationship with those harmful online communities.

The proliferation of this content is the result of passivity from tech firms, and in part, their profit motives. One study shows that Meta derives an annual $2 million in profit from pro-eating disorder content on Instagram. With content creating such profits, it is hard to see why social media sites would have ever self-regulated to ensure that content was hidden from children.

I met Meta this week, not to talk explicitly about eating disorders but to talk about the proposed ban on social media for under-16s. I can see that it is something the company feels challenged by, because it is concerned about a loss of income—not from people under 16, but from losing them as users as they move into adulthood. I hope, perhaps blindly, that there is an opportunity to work with those companies to ensure that the ban works properly. I support a ban on under-16s’ access to social media, and I know that my constituents do as well. We must also work with charities in this sector to make sure that the ban works.

I welcome the Online Safety Act and its commitment to ensuring that children see less harmful online content. Many constituents have contacted me since the summer raising concerns about the Act and what it means for their use of the internet as adults—often men, as hon. Members may not be surprised to hear. I understand the wider flaws, which I think were raised by the hon. Member for Bath when she spoke about their impact. While it is not perfect for eating disorders and suicidal ideation content for children and young people, it adds quite a lot of friction and makes it harder for young people to access that content. The Act is not perfect, but it is definitely a step in the right direction, and is a key part of protecting young people and reducing their exposure to harmful content, including eating disorder content and other negative influences.

I have only one more anecdote, you will be glad to hear, Ms Vaz. When I googled content about eating disorders and the Government policy on the train this morning, I was pleased to see Google was good at putting a warning in place, telling me that I might want to phone a particular helpline or contact a particular service to talk about eating disorders if that was why I was googling them. I was impressed by that and it is a good example of how tech companies, while they are quite often the bad guys, can do good stuff in this space as well. We must continue to ensure that communities supporting those with eating disorders are supported by proper medical care where necessary, and do all we can to remove harmful content.

I am sure this is not the first time that the Minister has attended a debate in Westminster Hall, or even in the main Chamber, in which the Government have been asked for a strategy, more staff and greater clarity about what they do. I know that he cares about this subject and that the Government are doing work in this area, but the calls for a strategy make sense because it would help to pin that work together and give us clarity about the next steps. I look forward to hearing the Minister sum up.

14:06

[Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) for introducing the debate and for her enormous dedication and hard work on this vital issue over many years.

I would like to talk about the themes that have arisen from constituency cases that my team and I have encountered and supported. The key concern is not the clinical aspects of care but the delay and fragmentation of the ownership of care. Life-threatening conditions can drift. Gaining access to care, support and treatment often involves a Kafkaesque labyrinth of dysfunctional process and procedure, and referrals and re-referrals between a range of teams in the complicated organisation that the NHS is. We need independent specialist assessments, safe interim arrangements, and timely and accountable co-ordination of care.

Some people wait more than eight months for an answer either way regarding whether they are eligible for treatment under the current criteria. That can further compromise their confidence in coming forward and asking for support. It can have a huge personal cost, impacting people’s ability to drive or work, reducing life expectancy and creating long-term medical complications, which add to wider pressures on the NHS. As in other debates that we have about healthcare in this country, this issue highlights an area where, if we get the start of the process right with early, preventive interventions, we will be able to help individuals and alleviate some of the pressure on critical care services.

[Wera Hobhouse]

It is worth mentioning again that if a person with an eating disorder does not get treatment, it takes them three times as long as they have been suffering to recover. If they have suffered from an eating disorder for three years, it takes them nine years to fully recover. We know from other health services that early intervention is key, but it is particularly important for eating disorders because the longer they are left, the much longer the recovery process is. Some people never recover and it is a life sentence.

[Olly Glover]

My hon. Friend again shows her wealth of knowledge and experience of this topic. Some of the cases that my team and I have supported have involved people who have been living with eating disorders for decades. I have also seen cases where the transition from support services for children and young people into those for adults has been managed badly. That is not unique to eating disorders; it is a wider issue in mental health provision.

As we have heard, eating disorders can have a devastating impact. They rob people of years of life, wipe out adolescence, remove educational and social opportunities, and leave many isolated and unable to cope. Eating disorders are one of the deadliest mental health conditions and constitute a significant health crisis. Cases of eating disorders have surged, with hospital admissions doubling in a decade. It is a huge concern, in the face of that crisis, that eating disorder services are being cut in much of the country. Over half of the country’s integrated care boards have cut real-terms spending on children’s eating disorder services in the last financial year.

I am proud of the leadership that parliamentarians such as my hon. Friend the Member for Bath and Baroness Parminter in the other place have shown on this issue, including working with campaign groups such as Dump the Scales. The scandal of people being told that they are “not thin enough” for medical help must end. Far too many people cannot access the services they need.

I welcome recent guidance from NHS England on how to design eating disorder services to support children and young people better, but we need to do more than tinker around the edges with updated guidance. We need a meaningful national strategy to transform these services, with more specialist support, and we need to build a culture across the health service and beyond that recognises the complexities of eating disorders and the terrible dangers they pose.

Lending urgency to that is the fact that the target of 95% of urgent cases receiving treatment within a week, and routine cases receiving it within four weeks, is routinely being missed. From September to November last year, only 78% of urgent referrals and 82% of routine referrals started treatment within the target timeframe. That is why I am very happy to support a wider Liberal Democrat campaign for investment in community health services and prevention, including better specialist support for people with eating disorders. As we heard from my hon. Friend, early intervention can greatly reduce the number of people who are suffering.

We are also campaigning for regular mental health check-ups—the concept of a mental health MOT—at key points in people’s lives when they are most vulnerable to mental ill health. Like others who have spoken, I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response. So many people are suffering, and lots of people are trying to help—that is not the issue. We need to make the overall system work much better, with all its different component parts working towards the goal of supporting people.

14:12

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Vaz. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) for securing this debate and for her dogged campaigning, her tireless work as chair of the APPG on eating disorders and her excellent opening speech.

I welcome Eating Disorders Awareness Week, and the important role that it plays in drawing attention to one of the deadliest and most harrowing conditions. I recognise and draw attention to the eating disorder charity Beat, which offers invaluable support for those with eating disorders, and the carers and healthcare professionals who provide support that, in many cases, can be lifesaving.

Anyone with personal experience of eating disorders will know just how devastating they can be. They rob young people of the formative years of their life, put immense strain on families and carers, and have long-lasting physical and psychological impacts. I was shocked to learn that hospital admissions for eating disorders have doubled in the last decade. A development as stark as that demands robust action and investment. At the same time, over half of the country’s integrated care boards have cut children’s eating disorder services. Children and young people cannot be allowed to slip through the net because of underfunded services.

The National Audit of Eating Disorders found huge disparities in the levels of support available for children compared with adults who have eating disorders. Adult community teams face an 89% higher demand than teams that support children and young people, with adults waiting twice as long for assessment and over 10 times as long for treatment. For a condition that progresses devastatingly quickly, early intervention is crucial.

The Liberal Democrats welcome NHS England’s recent guidance on improving the design of eating disorder services and community-based support, but that support cannot fulfil its potential without investment and a meaningful strategy to tackle the problem. I add the calls of my party to those from the Members who have made excellent speeches in today’s debate.

In Shropshire, I was pleased to see recent improvements in waiting times for children and young people awaiting treatment for eating disorders, with 96% of patients seen within four weeks. That has come from a fairly low standard, so it is a huge improvement, and I congratulate everybody involved. However, a quarter of children and young people referred to mental health services as a whole did not receive contact within the four-week waiting standard, and 19% were not seen within 18 weeks. Those waiting times are unacceptable. Urgent mental health problems are exactly that: urgent. Time is of the essence when tackling an eating disorder, and delays in assessment and treatment carry serious dangers.

I know from constituents who have gone through the process of trying to access treatment for their children just how difficult it can be to get support on time, because services are underfunded, waiting lists are long and resources are stretched. I have heard from parents of daughters whose condition was not deemed serious enough for them to be referred to an eating disorder clinic, despite their having a dangerously low weight and BMI—they were told, essentially, that she needed to be thinner. I do not need to explain just how problematic it is to imply that someone’s condition must get significantly worse before they can be seen.

One mother’s tale of struggling to get support for her daughter is too harrowing to report in this debate, but her cry for help speaks volumes:

“Please help us…I am scared and desperate.”

When patients do access treatment, gain some weight and are discharged, many are not given the continued mental health support they need to prevent relapses of the condition. That cannot go on.

We must not underestimate the impact of eating disorders on entire families. Patients require around-the-clock care in many cases to ensure that they receive the support and nutrition they urgently need. One self-employed single mother who wrote to me about the delays and failures she had encountered when seeking support for her daughters had to forgo her income to care for them. We need far better support for unpaid family carers struggling to support their loved ones with eating disorders, and we must ensure they have the training and advice they need to be able to provide the help that is so urgent.

The Government’s primary course of action for easing this burden should be to provide patients with the support they need, when they need it. That is why the Liberal Democrats are calling for proper investment in community mental health services, prevention and specialist support for eating disorders. We are campaigning to establish mental health hubs for young people in every community and to have a dedicated mental health professional in every primary and secondary school and regular mental health check-ups for the most vulnerable.

Our Opposition day debate on Tuesday called for action to ensure that cinema-style age classification ratings are applied to social media sites to prevent children from being subjected to the worrying proliferation of harmful content promoting eating disorders, which, as we have heard, can be so pernicious and damaging. I urge other parties in this place to put aside the politics of that and to support our calls—as many children’s charities do—to ensure that an appropriate safeguarding regime is put in place for children’s use of social media.

The Government must improve early access to mental health services so that cases can be caught early, before they become critical. Can the Minister commit to preserving the mental health investment standard and reinstating targets for the treatment of mental health issues, especially for young people, so that we can do that? The stories we hear from families and patients of their experiences of eating disorders are heartbreaking. We must treat these conditions with the urgency they deserve.

14:17

[Dr Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I congratulate the hon. Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) on securing this important debate and on her work in this area.

Eating disorders are deeply complex conditions. On the surface, disordered eating can take a variety of forms, including restricting the amount or the type of food eaten; binge eating large amounts of food in a short period and then purging that food through forced vomiting; excessive exercise; and laxative misuse to avoid weight gain. Beneath that surface lay a horde of drivers, such as control, shame, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder, poor body image, and mysophobia, which is also known as germophobia.

The covid pandemic provoked intense scrutiny of germs and cleanliness, took away people’s control over when they could go out and when they could see their friends, and drove their activities from the personal to the online, so it comes as no surprise that it saw a spike in eating disorder referrals. By early 2021-22, 3,400 people were treated for an eating disorder, compared with 1,900 in the same period in 2019-20.

The last Government introduced the mental health investment standard to increase mental health spending in local health systems, and it also included a pledge to increase mental health spending as a proportion of total health spending every year. With mental health accounting for over 20% of demand for health services, and a 2021 report finding that eating disorders cost the UK economy a £9.4 billion per year—

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

Can I ask you to speak up, please? People in the Gallery cannot hear.

[Dr Johnson]

I am sorry.

The last Government’s work to channel more resources into mental health could not have been more welcome. This year, 2025-26, will be the first since 2016-17 that mental health spending has not risen as a proportion of health spending. That contravention of the mental health investment standard has raised alarm bells at the Health and Social Care Committee. Can the Minister enlighten us as to why the Government have decided to break the mental health investment standard after nearly a decade of progress? Does he think the percentage is now about right? Does it concern him that some ICBs have cut funding for mental health services? How does he expect that to impact on patients suffering from eating disorders?

I am particularly concerned about the impact on children and young people, and I declare an interest as a consultant NHS paediatrician. Some 6.4% of adults have a diagnosed eating disorder, but 12.5% of 17 to 19-year-olds have been diagnosed with an eating disorder since 2023. That amounts to one in five girls in that age group—four times the prevalence in boys. What specific action is the Minister taking to improve early intervention?

The previous Government got the ball rolling on establishing mental health support teams in schools, and had reached 35% coverage by the time of the general election, with a commitment to increase that to 100% of schools and colleges in England by 2030. Does the Minister plan to build on that work? What further action is he taking to improve links between eating disorder services, schools and families to ensure a joined-up approach to accessing specialist help and early diagnosis, which, as we have heard, is critical?

The hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) spoke of the challenges of transition. As a paediatrician, I see the challenges of transitioning many paediatric and adolescent conditions between children’s and adult services, but can the Minister say what he is doing specifically for those transitioning with eating disorders?

In my role as chair of the APPG on emerging drugs and online behavioural trends, I know the effect of social media on children’s and young people’s behaviours. Researchers from University College London, who examined evidence from 50 studies in 17 countries, found that social media usage is linked to eating disorders in young people, as it viciously promotes the idea that it is essential to be thin and fit, triggering a potentially extreme preoccupation with body image, weight and shape. Those obsessions are compounded by AI content, which can depict simply unachievable so-called perfection. As the hon. Member for Bath said, there are harmful videos online, with algorithms driving that harm, and those who look at these things seeing them more and more.

I recently held a policy debating competition among year 10 and year 12 students in my constituency, where students chose the topic of debate. Many of them spoke in favour of a social media ban for children as young as 16. It is a difficult issue, and that is not a perfect solution, but having just got a new mobile phone myself, I wonder why, when someone buys a phone, it cannot be set at a fixed age that can be changed only by the adult who pays the bill. A change in the law to restrict social media for under-16s would help to reduce that problem. I am interested in the Minister’s thoughts on that.

NHS guidance on eating disorders for ICBs has been raised in the debate. The NHS has refreshed that guidance, which is welcome, but patients will feel the difference only if it is actually implemented. The Minister has confirmed that there will not be a dedicated strategy for eating disorders, and there is no mention at all of eating disorders in the 70,000-word 10-year plan. Is the Minister confident that the refreshed guidance for ICBs will be sufficient on its own to improve care for people with eating disorders and to get waiting lists down? Does he have a strategy for how it will be enforced?

We have talked about the effects on families and carers. What action is the Minister taking to engage families, carers and supportive charities in plans for care? What support is available for parents, carers and siblings?

Workforce is key to delivering this strategy. We know that waiting times for eating disorder treatment are getting worse; analysis from Beat found that, in some cases, people with eating disorders face a three-and-a-half-year delay between falling ill and starting treatment. For someone with an eating disorder, that is three and a half years deeper into the illness. As we have heard, that makes it all the more difficult to treat the patient effectively and quickly pull them out of that difficult, dark place. What steps is the Minister taking to increase workforce capacity to help treat these patients and restore some stability and normality to their lives? I feel as though I ask this question every time, but the NHS long-term workforce plan is still not with us, having been delayed from last year, so when will it be published, and what tangible action will it take to boost the NHS eating disorders service?

It is not just about hiring more staff; it is also about where we are hiring them. That is important work, but more needs to be done to build on the progress. The Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership produced a highly detailed report about in-patient eating disorder service provision in the UK. As expected, there were blackspots for those vital services in many rural and coastal areas, such as in Lincolnshire. For adults and families in constituencies such as mine, where the closest service may be an hour’s car journey away, accessing eating disorder services is remarkably difficult. The Government have been insistent that rural and coastal areas will not be left behind on healthcare, but the blackspots tell us otherwise.

[Dr Arthur]

I thank the hon. Member for giving way—I have to say that she is one of my favourite Tories. Does she agree that there is a real inequality here? A one-hour car drive is a challenge, but if someone does not have a car, it is even more difficult. If they have a child, they might have to take a day off work to take them somewhere. So getting services, or capacity in the community, closer to people should absolutely be the ambition, shouldn’t it?

[Dr Johnson]

I completely agree. This is not just about people who have a car; for people who do not have a car and who are reliant on public transport, it can be even more difficult. People also struggle to take time off work because of the financial cost. For those who do have a car, there is also the cost of the petrol or diesel to get to the appointment. I would appreciate it if the Minister could update us on what he is doing to ensure that the neighbourhood and community slant of the three pillars of his health improvement plan are working in that regard.

As the hon. Member for Bath said, in-patient services are limited in capacity. In my paediatric practice, I have seen patients waiting on acute general paediatric wards—sometimes for several weeks—but those are really not the right place for them to be cared for. Could the Minister update us on what he is doing about increasing capacity in regional services?

I would like to speak a little about two other types of eating disorder: avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder and Prader-Willi syndrome. ARFID involves limiting the amount or variety of food consumed. It is not just picky eating. I have seen a teenager who lives on just plain pasta, nuggets and chips, and a younger boy who lives on a single flavour of one brand of milkshake and no solid food at all. That can be driven by fear and sensory and other issues. What is the Minister doing to make sure that services are available for these young children? NHS England’s refreshed eating disorder guidance recommends:

“ICBs should develop and deliver ARFID care pathways”.

What steps is the Minister taking to improve early diagnosis of ARFID, and what work will be done to train primary carers to identify it in children and adults, particularly in cases of neurodivergence?

Prader-Willi syndrome is a rare genetic disorder causing excessive appetite and overeating, which can lead to dangerous weight gain and restricted growth. Around 2,000 people live with Prader-Willi syndrome in the UK, and there is no cure. It is not mentioned in the NHS guidance, so what work is the Minister doing to ensure that people suffering from PWS have access to the care they need? What steps are we taking to expand genetic testing at birth to identify PWS and improve early access to treatment for these patients?

To sum up, mental health challenges are on the rise, and eating disorders are no exception. I urge the Minister to implement a clear approach to tackling eating disorders for adults, children and young people.

14:27

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Dr Zubir Ahmed)]

It is an honour and a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I congratulate the hon. Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) on securing today’s debate and raising this important topic—as she always does. I also pay tribute to her for her long-standing advocacy on this topic and for all the work she does in the eating disorders all-party parliamentary group. She is joined today by a number of hon. Members from across the House, who have made thoughtful contributions.

One hon. Member who is conspicuous by his absence—he has already been mentioned, and I informed him in advance that I would mention him too, Ms Vaz—is my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West (Mr Quigley). He is my friend, and he is conspicuous because of the tireless work he does and the way he advocates for persons with eating disorders. I know that that is born out of personal interest and pain. We miss his presence here today and send him our good wishes from across the House.

It is important that we are having this debate today to note Eating Disorders Awareness Week. This year’s theme rightly places the focus on the power of community, which speaks to a simple but profound truth: no one should face an eating disorder alone. Recovery is not only about clinical treatment, vital though that is; it is also about the networks of support that surround that individual—not only health professionals, but mums, dads, grandparents, siblings, friends, teachers, colleagues and many others.

[Wera Hobhouse]

One of the most harrowing things that we hear again and again when taking evidence in the APPG is how families feel completely abandoned. People have to give up work, often over years, because they are meant to care for someone with a severe condition and they do not have the capacity to do so by themselves. It is only when that condition is finally so bad that the loved one is then readmitted to hospital. That revolving door must end. The human cost to that tragedy—apart from the cost to the NHS—must end. It is absolutely tragic and wrong.

[Dr Ahmed]

I wholeheartedly agree. The Government are committed to ending the revolving door for many conditions—this is an exemplar, in many ways—by joining up care and the streams of information that underpin it. One of our main commitments in our 10-year health plan is to have more joined-up care, to move it from sickness to prevention and to move from hospital into community, where that join-up can happen.

This community can thrive only when it is built on a foundation of timely, effective care. That is why we are focused on reforming eating disorder services so that people can access help when they need it, not after their condition has escalated. That approach underpins the new NHS guidance for children and young people’s eating disorder services, published last month, which is clear that care should be timely, joined up and delivered as close to home as possible.

As many here know, demand for mental health support, including eating disorder services, rose sharply during the pandemic, and the rise has been sustained thereafter. Although services remain under significant pressure, as a result of the additional investment there are some green shoots in system capacity and capability to better meet rising demand and reduce the waits that hon. Members have described.

In December 2025, 83.3% of routine referrals to children and young people’s community eating disorder services and 78.8% of urgent referrals started treatment within four weeks and one week respectively. That is a marked improvement in performance, compared with the situation six months earlier. In June last year, only 72.2% of routine referrals and 63.7% of urgent referrals were seen within four weeks and one week respectively. Although those are encouraging signs, I am under no illusion: too many children and young people are still waiting far too long for support. That is exactly why further reform and delivery are needed.

The Government’s long-term approach to mental health reform is set out in the 10-year health plan, which is clear in its direction. It shifts care from hospital to community, from sickness to prevention and, of course, from analogue to digital, which will be so important when it comes to having joined-up care. I assure hon. Members that those shifts are not abstract principles, but practical changes that are already being embedded. I know that they matter deeply for people living with eating disorders, and the families and loved ones who support them.

But I recognise that plans alone do not deliver care. Delivery depends on people and having the right workforce with the right skills in the right places. That is why, on top of the workforce plan that will come to fruition in late spring or early summer, we are investing in the workforce. We are committed to providing an additional 8,500 new mental health professionals across child and adult mental health services, to cutting waiting times and to ensuring that people access treatment and support earlier than ever before.

We are also working to strengthen skills and capability across the system. NHS England has introduced comprehensive training to ensure that staff across mental and physical health services can recognise eating disorders early and respond safely and effectively. That training supports clinicians working not only in the community but in primary and, crucially, acute care settings, where I used to work. I often saw such patients on my acute general surgical receiving ward rounds. The training includes specialist programmes, including the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ eating disorders credential, expanded access to family-based therapies, cognitive behavioural therapy for eating disorders, and dedicated training on ARFID, which the hon. Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Dr Johnson) mentioned. That work is about giving staff the skills, confidence and, crucially, clarity they need to deliver safe, high-quality care and reduce some of the avoidable harm that we have discussed today.

I am pleased to say that funding for children and young people’s eating disorder services has increased significantly, from £46.7 million in 2017-18 to an actual spend of £106.3 million in 2024-25. With that extra funding, we have focused on enhancing the capacity of community eating disorder teams across the country, because we know that timely, effective care leads to better outcomes, supports recovery and helps to prevent conditions escalating to the point at which hospital admission becomes inevitable.

When admission is necessary, stronger community care can reduce length of stay when it is safe. We recognise the concerns that in-patient capacity remains under pressure in some parts of our country. There are reports of individuals being discharged at very low body mass due to bed availability, as the hon. Member for Bath highlighted. Discharge decisions must always be about clinical judgment and patient safety, not capacity constraints. NHS England reassures me and continues to work with providers and integrated care boards to ensure that sufficient specialist provision and safe step-down pathways will be in place.

[Dr Caroline Johnson]

The Minister’s speech is very interesting. He talks about an increase in capacity, much of which will require workforce. I noticed that when he mentioned the workforce plan, he said “spring or early summer”, which is a change from his previous wording, which was always “spring”. Is that a sign that it is being delayed further?

[Dr Ahmed]

As always, the hon. Lady reads too much into my words. I am a Scot, so for me, spring and summer sometimes mean the same thing—and indeed winter. I can reassure her that there was no subtext to that nuance earlier in my speech. We remain committed and are on track to deliver on the workforce plan.

We recognise concerns, of course, and NHS England is addressing them. Prevention must be central to how we respond to eating disorders, particularly for children and young people. That is why we are also providing £13 million to strengthen the role of mental health support teams in schools and colleges through enhancements, so that concerns about disordered eating and body image can be identified and addressed much earlier. Acting sooner improves outcomes, reduces the need for more intensive treatment later and helps to ensure that our young people get the support they need, at the right time.

We are encouraged by the progress being made, but I am under no illusions. I know that sustained improvement depends on clear, consistent expectations for high-quality care across the whole pathway. That is why, alongside the 10-year health plan, we are developing a modern service framework for severe mental illness, which I can reassure the House will include eating disorders, to help to reduce avoidable harm from them and improve outcomes for persons affected by them. However, to get it right, we need expert input across the system, so my noble Friend Baroness Merron, the Minister responsible for mental health, will be hosting a roundtable discussion with eating disorder charities, clinicians and those with lived experience, to ensure that the modern service framework delivers meaningful improvements for people with eating disorders, with lived experience at the heart of it.

We have spoken, rightly, about online safety issues as they intersect with mental illness and eating disorders. As a parent, I of course remain deeply concerned about the widespread availability online of harmful material promoting eating disorders, suicide and self-harm, which can be far too easily accessed by people, including young people, who may be vulnerable. The UK’s Online Safety Act 2023 makes platforms—including social media, search and pornography services—legally responsible for keeping people, especially children, safe online. All providers must mitigate the risks of illegal harm on their services, and all providers of services likely to be accessed by children must take steps to mitigate their risks to children, especially as regards content related to eating disorders.

[Wera Hobhouse]

The Minister is very generous with his time. I mentioned this issue in my speech and I see it across the board, not just with regard to eating disorders. The Online Safety Act provides that Ofcom can intervene, but only if the content is reported, so we are relying on often very vulnerable people to report something before Ofcom intervenes. That cannot be right. There has to be a stronger emphasis on the social media platforms actually taking down accounts very quickly and, as I have also said, ensuring that they do not just reappear under a different name.

[Dr Ahmed]

The hon. Lady makes a really valid point. She will know, as I do, that the regulation of these platforms in relation to children’s access is a live issue at the heart of Government at the moment. She is right: the current provisions are not strong enough to be adequate safeguards. We do need more proactive intervention from our technology partners. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology takes that very seriously and is pushing very hard on it in relation to not only harm in this space, but harm in general, for children online.

Ofcom ensures that services uphold these duties, including for smaller online sites. Its small but risky services taskforce has assessed 20 services relating to this harm, over half of which have been at high risk for eating disorder content. I am happy to write to my colleagues in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, on the back of this debate, to learn from them what further action specific to eating disorders is coming down the pipeline, and I can relay that information to hon. Members assembled in this Chamber today.

I also share the deep concern about reports of people with eating disorders being offered end-of-life care.

[Dr Arthur]

Before we move on to end-of-life care, I welcome the great offer that the Minister has given to reach out to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology to better understand what they are doing on digital platforms. I expect that many of the people who are going to respond to the consultation around the banning of social media for under-16s will come from the healthcare profession, because of the connections between mental health and eating disorders and the use of these platforms. Will he be proactively asking for action to make sure that young people are protected? That would also mean more resources for people who have eating disorders, because hopefully fewer people would be coming forward.

[Dr Ahmed]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Being proactive and following the evidence should be our north star when we are formulating policy; I know that is true of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists has been explicit about eating disorders and end-of-life care. Anorexia nervosa is not a terminal illness in its own right. The college’s guidance on medical emergencies in eating disorders was developed precisely to ensure that preventable deaths become a thing of the past. NHS England is clear that no patient with an eating disorder should routinely be placed in palliative care. Our focus must always be on treatment and recovery, and underpinned by the hope of recovery.

We also share concerns about the accurate recordings of deaths where eating disorders may have been a contributing factor. The hon. Member for Bath outlined some of her frustrations regarding correspondence with the Ministry of Justice and I would be happy to take up that call on her behalf to make sure that she gets the correspondence that she is entitled to. The statutory medical examiner and coroner system provides a clear framework to ensure that deaths are properly investigated and recorded so that lessons are identified and patient safety is strengthened.

Although it is for the coroner to exercise independent judicial discretion to determine what is recorded as the medical cause of death, I can reassure hon. Members that the coroner’s office has been undergoing training to ensure that the recording of deaths associated with eating disorders is done more accurately and proactively. Accurate recording matters, and we will continue to work with our partners, including colleagues in the Ministry of Justice and clinicians, to ensure that not only are the statistics captured, but the learning underpinning those statistics is reflected in genuine improvements to care.

Eating disorders are serious and complex mental illnesses that can affect anyone at any age and in any community or family. They require timely treatment, skilled professionals and sustained support thereafter.

[Helen Morgan]

The Minister is probably about to draw his remarks to a close, but can I press him again on the mental health investment standard, which should ensure that the proportion of NHS spending on mental health goes up every year? In the last year for which we have numbers, it had gone up as a proportion of ICB spend, but had fallen as a proportion of overall NHS spend. Can the Minister commit that the Department will not be abandoning that standard, and that we will see mental health spending go up each year?

[Dr Ahmed]

I can certainly commit to the hon. Lady that mental health spending in real terms will go up every single year. It went up by £688 million in real terms this year. The good nature of this debate permits me to push back only gently against the hon. Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham, who talked about spending in the NHS, but I do feel I need to push back a little: one of the reasons why that percentage in statistical terms is lower, but the spend in real terms is higher is because we had to spend so much more money—the record £26 billion that was afforded in additional spend by the Chancellor in the Budget—in other parts of the health service to compensate for the decay and decline in the NHS over the last 14 years. But the hon. Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan) has my commitment to the overall philosophy that mental health spending will increase year on year.

As I was saying, eating disorders are serious and complex; over and above skilled professionals, they also require compassion, understanding and collective responsibility. Through the 10-year health plan, we are shifting care closer to home; strengthening early intervention; expanding the workforce where necessary, such as with community mental health workers; improving standards and investing in the community services that make recovery possible. We are also equipping staff with the right training, protecting young people online—while continuing to improve and explore the mechanisms through which we can do that—and working with experts and those with lived experience to ensure that the reform we are choosing to pursue delivers real and lasting change.

We know that the policy framework alone is never enough. Change also depends on the voices of campaigners, including many who join us here today, clinicians, families and those who have shared their lived experience. I can assure everyone that their advocacy continues to shape this Government’s approach, and it will continue to do so.

To those living with an eating disorder, and to the families supporting them, I want to say this: “You are not invisible. You are not alone.” This Government are committed to building a system that responds with urgency, expertise and compassion. Our task—across this House and beyond it—is to ensure that when someone reaches out for help, the system we create is ready to respond with urgency, expertise and, crucially, hope. I once again thank hon. Members for contributing to this debate and I look forward to continuing this work with colleagues from across the House.

14:46

[Wera Hobhouse]

I thank everybody who contributed to this debate in such a thoughtful way. First and foremost, my thanks go to the tireless campaigners—the people with lived experience and their families, who have shared their stories over so many years, and say to them, “Without you, Eating Disorder Awareness Week would not exist.” Awareness has definitely improved, but I repeat my frustration that even so, the outcomes for many people suffering from this tragic and devastating condition have not improved.

I know this now not-so-new Labour Government have a massive task in front of them to transform the NHS. If their 10-year health plan were to be meaningful at all, everything in it could absolutely be applied to eating disorder services: shifting from crisis treatment to prevention; shifting to community care; shifting to parity of mental and physical health. It is about all those things. If the Government want to show their strategy is working, they can show that through eating disorder services and the improvement of outcomes.

Currently, the tsunami of need is not met by the services that we have, and that needs to shift. Last year, I said I was hopeful that 2025 would be the year in which we changed something. I have not seen that. I will not make that same prediction for 2026, but I will say to the Government, “Please listen very carefully to our call for an eating disorder strategy.” I believe that joined-up thinking would make a real difference and that the Government could show, through the improvement of eating disorder services and final outcomes for those who are affected by this devastating condition, that their plan is working.

The Government must develop a strategy and implement the 10-year health plan for eating disorder services. If we see the outcomes and we can measure them properly, I believe that the Government will be turning a corner for the NHS as a whole.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered Eating Disorders Awareness Week 2026.

14:49

Sitting suspended.

Independent Faith Schools: VAT

Thursday 26th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Sir Alec Shelbrooke in the Chair]

15:00

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the impact of VAT on independent faith schools.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. I hope that this debate will go well. I welcome the Minister to her place and look forward to engaging with her. I have given her a copy of my speaking notes; the last two pages are my asks. I also thank the hon. Member for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire (Ian Sollom), who is here as the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, and the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Joy Morrissey), who I think has been elevated to the role of Opposition spokesperson for this debate.

It is a real pleasure to raise the issue. It is certainly not the first time that we have discussed this move by the Government, which was announced when they came into power. I note that in the Public Gallery we have Dr Garrie-John Barnes, the new chief executive officer of the Christian Schools Trust; Steve Beegoo, the head of education at Christian Concern; and three people who are staff and parents at a small Christian school in Reading that is having to close because of the VAT and business rates relief policies. They are among the instigators for this debate, which I have secured on their behalf and on behalf of many others—I will outline who they are as I make progress through my speech.

For the record, my private secretary is also here: the lady in the corner of the Public Gallery. She writes all my speeches. I think people say, “My goodness, she’s overworked,” and she probably is, but there you are. She is not often here, but she is here for this debate and I thank her.

Although my sons and grandchildren all went through the publicly funded school system and have excelled in their own right, I have met many people who have made the difficult decision to pay towards their children’s education, not because they can afford to do so, but because their personal faith is at odds with the many moves away from the moral values and ethics that they cherish. That is their motivation, and that is why we are having this debate. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for giving me and other hon. Members the chance to contribute to it.

The idea that independent schools are for the ultra-wealthy is simply not true. I secured this debate for my Strangford constituents who attend the Bangor independent Christian school in the neighbouring constituency of North Down; for international students who attend Rockport, outside Belfast; for those who attend Holywood Steiner school; and for those who attend Jewish schools or Muslim schools. I do not need to agree with the theology to agree that pupils’ parents should have a school choice that reflects treasured, essential values.

I have been in touch with the Independent Schools Council, which represents about 1,400 schools across the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Those 1,400 schools represent roughly 80% of all UK pupils who attend fee-paying schools. According to the ISC’s most recent annual census, 663 of the schools among its membership have a religious affiliation or ethos, meaning that 47% of the schools that the ISC represents are faith schools. That reinforces my belief that we need to ensure that the Government look past the view that this is about rich parents, and that they understand the bigger faith picture. I hope to focus on that faith picture, as I hope other hon. Members will.

Overall, about 370,000 pupils attend an independent school in England with an identified religious ethos. That equates to some 60% of pupils at independent schools. It is not a small figure, and I say respectfully that it cannot be ignored. We need to address the issue. Although the majority of those schools are of Christian denomination, the independent sector also provides essential provision to minority faiths.

I talked to the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) today. He wanted to be here, but he has an event at 5 o’clock and it would have been too tight to attend this debate and then get to Birmingham. I think he is somewhere in Birmingham today.

About 20,000 pupils attend Islamic faith schools. The importance of faith schools is clear. All schools must follow the Equality Act 2010 and welcome every pupil, but issues around curriculum, diet and religious holidays can make it difficult for more religiously observant pupils to be accommodated in mainstream schools. Many independent faith schools therefore provide access to education in a religious context that is not always possible in the state sector. That can be Muslim, Jewish or Christian.

Fees in many independent faith schools are less than the state pays per pupil—circa £8,000—and in some cases community fundraising efforts support those who are less able to pay for education. For example, the average annual fee for Islamic schools in the ISC is about £3,000 per year. Chinuch UK is an organisation that represents some 20,000 Haredi Orthodox Jewish pupils attending 65 schools across the United Kingdom. On average, those schools typically ask for a voluntary contribution of less than £100 per week. The Christian Schools Trust represents 25 schools charging between £3,000 and £8,000 per year in fees, often with high levels of bursary provision. That gives us a bit of background, factually and financially.

The ISC has been tracking the impact of VAT on the sector as a whole. Although it may take a few years for us to see the full impact, it is clear that there has been an initial impact. Opposition to the VAT on independent schools, particularly independent faith schools, has been an aggravating factor for the parents back home in my constituency whose children attend the independent faith school in Bangor. They are not rich people. They are working people who scrimp and save to put money aside so that they can ensure that they will be in a position to provide the faith education that they wish for their children.

Although the data cannot be broken down to measure the impact of VAT on faith schools specifically, case studies make it clear that the impact has been felt strongly. On pupil movement from the independent sector to the state sector, the Treasury impact assessment of VAT states that

“a greater degree of impact may be felt by faith school pupils if they cannot be placed in an alternative school with the same religious denomination.”

I say respectfully to the Government that their policy has, in a way, discriminated against those from independent schools who might have, and probably do have, a religious denomination that they wish to adhere to and stay with.

The result has been that since the general election in July 2024, 110 independent schools have closed, of which 10 have been involved in mergers. There has been an impact on about 9,500 students, including almost 2,500 with special educational needs and disabilities. New independent schools that have opened are predominantly SEND schools, while those closing are mostly mainstream schools. Overall, we are seeing a net loss of mainstream provision. Whereas some of the new independent schools setting up are specifically looking after children with special educational needs, a great many others have been disaffected and have nowhere for their faith and educational and religious viewpoint to be retained.

In the schools that remain open, there has been a drop of 25,000, or 5.2%, in the number of students since 2023, according to the ISC’s September pupil numbers survey. The September 2025 pupil numbers survey showed a fall in pupil numbers of 17,000, or 3.6%, in the past academic year alone. Those stats show the unfortunate impact of what is happening, which is that having to pay VAT is putting many independent faith schools at a disadvantage. It is also notable that the September pupil numbers survey continued to show a larger fall in intake years, with reception and year 7 numbers down closer to 5% in the last academic year.

Although there might be some debate about the extent of the impact of VAT on pupil numbers, the fall is out of step with the normal trend of our pupil surveys and confirms the decline shown by the Department for Education’s figures and by the ISC census published in spring 2025. It is a trend that has happened directly because of VAT on independent schools. It puts them at a disadvantage, leaves them disaffected and confirms the decline. That cannot be ignored. What was portrayed as a tax on the rich has instead turned out to be a tax on those with a strong faith.

No one would expect me, as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief, to highlight the shortfall in religious freedom in other countries without highlighting a decision in this country, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, that is having an educational impact on those of a strong faith, whether that faith is Christian, Muslim or Jewish. My job as chair of the APPG is to highlight that in a way that I hope will come over strongly and show what the effect has been.

The decision to apply VAT to independent school fees was projected to raise some £1.5 billion annually. Although raising revenue is important—nobody denies that it is critical for the Government to raise revenue to pay the bills and pay for public services—we must ensure that the policy is proportionate and does not unintentionally harm those it was never meant to target. I do not doubt that the Government did not set out with the intention to effect the changes that are clearly happening in independent faith-based schools.

This debate is not and has never been about elite institutions charging some £30,000 a year for fees. I am talking about parents and young people such as those in my constituency who travel to the Bangor independent Christian school. They are not rich. They scrimp and save. They do not take holidays; they put their money aside so that the child can have an education at a faith-based school that can hopefully be of benefit to them.

This debate is about low-fee independent faith schools, many of which charge under £4,000 annually and which serve modest income families in Jewish, Muslim and Christian communities. For those families, faith-based education is not a luxury but a deep necessity. In many areas, there is no equivalent provision in the state sector that reflects their religious ethos. Alongside other hon. Members—including you, Sir Alec, based on comments that you have made in the Chamber—I want to protect that religious ethos on my constituents’ behalf.

The Independent Schools Council has proposed a simple and fair solution, which is my ask for the Minister. She will find it on pages 6 and 7 of my speaking notes. I am very conscious that we are asking for something that the Minister may not be able to confirm that she can do. My request is that she ask the responsible Treasury Minister to look at the comments and the solutions that have been put forward, which I believe may be helpful. I always try to be constructive, as you know, Sir Alec—I set out what I am trying to do in any debate to which I contribute in this House—and I ask for that in return.

The Independent Schools Council has proposed a simple and fair solution: introduce a VAT registration threshold for independent schools charging below the state-funding benchmark of £7,690 per pupil. If that could be considered, it would be a step in the right direction, as it would enable small independent faith schools to move forward in a positive fashion. The proposal is not a novel concept: the VAT system already includes thresholds to protect smaller entities from disproportionate burdens, and over half of UK businesses operate below the VAT registration threshold. Those are examples of this working, and of how it can be done. Again, I ask the Minister to refer this solution to the correct person in the correct Department to ensure that it can be done.

Only around 270 independent schools—roughly 10% of them—would qualify under the ISC’s proposal, but it would make a difference, as it would enable smaller schools to survive and come out on the other side. About 54,000 pupils would benefit, and the VAT revenue loss is estimated to be £32 million, which is just 2% of the projected £1.5 billion that the Department will get from putting VAT on independent school fees. However, if even a small percentage of those pupils transfer to the state sector, the cost to the Treasury rises sharply. That is a negative side to the policy. If there are no independent faith schools, pupils will have to go into the mainstream, and if they do that, the cost factor rises. If all those pupils were absorbed into the state sector, it would cost more than £415 million annually, even before accounting for infrastructure expansion.

In fiscal terms, the exemption is modest; in social terms, it is significant. This threshold would protect low-income families, preserve community-based education, maintain educational diversity and avoid putting unnecessary pressure on the state system. Those are some benefits that could be derived from moving towards the VAT registration threshold of £7,690 per pupil, under which a percentage of independent faith schools would qualify and 54,000 pupils would benefit. It would also not put the same pressure on the educational system as doing nothing would. In my opinion, and that of some of the experts and some of those in the Gallery, implementation would be straightforward. School fee information is publicly available, Ofsted already inspects fee policies and anti-avoidance safeguards are in place.

This is not about special treatment or asking for something that nobody else should get; it would enable people to have their faith, whether they be Christian, Muslim or Jewish, and to have their children educated in the school they wish, without it costing them the earth. It is about proportionality and fairness.

[Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)]

I appreciate the solution that the hon. Gentleman is presenting for faith-based schools, but does he accept that any tax on education is wrong in principle? Would he support my party’s policy of reversing the burden of VAT for all independent schools?

[Jim Shannon]

This debate is quite clearly on VAT on independent faith-based schools, but I do support that principle and have voted accordingly in the Chamber, as has been recorded. I am today putting forward the case for independent faith-based schools and asking for them to be considered differently, but I accept what the hon. Gentleman says.

This issue is about proportionality, fairness and protecting vulnerable communities from unintended harm. The Government may not have accepted or understood the harm that this would cause, but there is a way of preventing it. I put that suggestion to the Minister. I believe that we can meet our fiscal objectives without undermining access to faith-based education for families of modest means.

Those are the people I know, the people from my constituency who send their children to independent, faith-based schools. They are the ones who have asked me to bring forward this debate. People here in the Public Gallery represent some 1,400 schools across the United Kingdom. We speak for people with a Christian faith, a Muslim faith and a Jewish faith—I make that quite clear. I urge the Minister and the Government to consider a targeted VAT threshold, to reflect economic realism—that is what we want to try to do—and social responsibility.

I am pleased that the Minister is in her place; this is the second time this week that she has come to Westminster Hall. I look to her respectfully and graciously to enable those conversations within the Cabinet, and to right the wrong that has been done.

15:21

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

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. I thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for bringing forward this debate.

It is well established that the Liberal Democrats oppose taxing education, whether that is independent, faith or non-faith schools. We did not support the Government’s decision to end the VAT exemption for independent schools, nor them treating such schools differently from other independent education providers for VAT purposes. Neither did we support the Government’s policy to remove private schools’ charitable business rates relief of 80%, for those that are charities.

Our position applies equally to all independent schools, but I acknowledge that for many parents, choosing a faith school is not primarily a financial calculation; it is an expression of deeply held conviction about how their children should be raised, and about community and belief. The Government should be mindful of how the policy bears on those for whom a faith education is not a luxury but a matter of conscience. It must be the choice of parents to decide where their children are educated. We understand that the choices parents make have many reasons, and it is parents’ right to make such choices without being subject to further taxes.

I have heard from several of my constituents on this issue, none of them wealthy but all of them working hard and wanting to do the very best for their children. Some, alongside many others across the country, have struggled to find a local state secondary school place for their child and have been offered one many miles away. That has meant that they have had to resort to private school, while they sit on long waiting lists for places that will never become available, leaving them under considerable financial pressures.

Many other parents have been failed by the school their children attended, which has not provided the support that they need. They have been forced to move to the private sector, again at considerable cost. That has not been a choice, but something they feel has been forced on them, because of issues with the school system. Any parent making that choice, however, for whatever reason, should certainly not be penalised with more taxes.

It must be noted that parents of children with special educational needs and disabilities often turn to independent schools, because support is not available in local state schools. Independent schools educate more than 100,000 children with SEND. That number tells its own story.

In the past year alone, 100 independent schools are reported to have closed their doors and a further 26 are predicted to follow this year. A small number of those were part of the natural churn, but the majority were not. They include primary and secondary schools, sixth-form colleges and special educational needs schools. The Liberal Democrats remain concerned that such ongoing closures will have a knock-on effect in some areas of the country, which will see an increase in pupils applying and entering the state school system. In Kent, for example, nearly 100 state school inquiries were made in just 48 hours, after the independent Bishop Challoner school announced its closure. The state school system is already struggling with large class sizes, declining teacher numbers and increasing numbers of pupils with SEND. The Government cannot expect the state sector to absorb the pressures that these increased numbers will bring.

The Liberal Democrats, however, do believe that independent schools benefiting from VAT exemptions should give back to their local communities. Indeed, many already do, through shared facilities, joint programmes and genuine partnerships with neighbouring state schools. We want to see that best practice become universal, with investment proportional to school size and fees, and schools expected to demonstrate their contribution through the inspection process. Faith schools in particular often have a strong tradition of community service that goes well beyond the school gates. We should recognise that and see it built upon.

The Government must look seriously at the negative impact of VAT on faith and non-faith independent schools, the impact on the state sector, and the very real financial burden on families who have already paid tax into the system. I look forward to hearing from the Minister how the Government intend to address the concerns expressed today.

15:26

[Joy Morrissey (Beaconsfield) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. This issue is very close to my heart, and I am grateful to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for bringing it to Westminster Hall. I see how the issue affects my constituents, and the Conservatives care very much about it because it goes to our fundamental values. Do we believe that people should have individual choice—parental choice—for where they send their child to school, or should the state control everything?

This feels like a very vindictive tax, there to punish those who want choice in religion and in education, and have aspiration for where they send their child. This tax does not punish the wealthy; it punishes those who are working to barely get by. As the hon. Member for Strangford said, it punishes those who are saving up, not going on holidays, and sacrificing everything to send their child to the faith school that they choose. That may be because of their religious belief or because that school offers additional SEND provision that they cannot get in a mainstream school. I know parents who have sent their child to a school that is not of their faith because it is the only alternative to bullying or other challenges that their child is facing in school.

These schools have been a lifeline for so many parents. Parents have come to me with tears in their eyes, saying that they can no longer send their child to the best school for them, because the state has said that they do not deserve to go to that school, as they do not have enough money to pay for the extra tax. It is a vindictive tax. We are the only European country that is taxing education. How can that be right? This limits choice. I believe in personal choice, competition, and letting people make their own decisions on where they send their child to school. This policy restricts that. It means that more children will flood into the state sector and compete for SEND places. Many children will be unable to find another school of the same denomination and practise their faith.

I am glad that the Conservatives have pledged to reverse this policy, because I do not think we are a country that wants to limit personal religious freedom, personal choice and parental aspiration. The state does not always know best. If your child has autism, is being bullied, or is not getting the faith education that they need in the state sector, that is what independent faith schools exist for. If you wish to sacrifice your income and other comforts to send your child to that school, it should be your choice. As Conservatives, we believe that the policy should be scrapped, and we will continue to advocate for that.

I know that Members have many fun and eventful things to do today, so I will conclude. I thank the hon. Member for Strangford for bringing this debate to the House, because it is important that we do not forget the impact this policy will have in the next few years. Sacrifice is no longer enough for people who desperately want to educate their children in a way that we took for granted 20 years ago. We took for granted that our child could be raised in the Jewish faith, in Islam—[Interruption.] Is there a time limit, Sir Alec?

[Sir Alec Shelbrooke (in the Chair)]

No, but you should be addressing the Chair.

[Joy Morrissey]

I am sorry—you are right, Sir Alec. The impacts of this policy are something that we have to continue to raise throughout our time in Parliament, until the next general election. We cannot forget that this should not stand; we need to reverse the legislation.

15:30

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Olivia Bailey)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. I thank all hon. Members for attending, and particularly the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for securing this debate and for his characteristically engaging speech. I am grateful for the suggestions that he made, which have all been noted. I also congratulate his staff member, who is in the Public Gallery, on her super-human efforts with the volume of wonderful speeches she produces. It was great that the hon. Member was able to congratulate her as well. While I perhaps did not agree with the content of the speech given by the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Joy Morrissey), I admire the speed with which she assembled it here today.

Education matters. It sits at the very heart of this Government’s mission to break down barriers to opportunity, ensuring every child, wherever they live and whatever their background, has the best possible start in life and access to a high-quality education. Our priority is clear: to raise school standards for every child. I believe that this is a priority shared by colleagues across the House, as is clear from the speeches in this debate.

The Government value the contribution that faith schools make to our diverse education system. Faith schools, whether private or state funded, have long played, and continue to play, a really vital role. We continue to work closely with faith school providers, representative organisations and local authorities to find ways to support private faith schools. The Government respect parental choice, and faith schools in the private and state sectors will remain part of that choice.

The truth is, however, that we inherited a dire fiscal situation from the previous Government, and families, including those in faith communities, were dealing with sky-high interest rates, underfunded public services and a broken NHS. That is why we have taken some fair and necessary decisions on tax, which will stabilise public finances and secure the additional funding required to deliver on our commitments to education and young people. The measure that we are discussing will raise essential revenue that will be invested in our public services, such as the £1.7 billion increase to the core schools budget in 2026-27, taking core school funding to £67 billion compared with £65.3 billion in 2025-26.

The Government carefully considered a range of representations made by faith schools, including a proposal for a low-fee carve out. However, the Government concluded that in line with the principles of protecting revenue and fairness, faith schools should remain in scope of the VAT policy. We understand that some parents make the decision to send their child to a private school because of its particular faith ethos, and because they feel that a particular type of school is better able to meet their child’s needs than their place in the state sector. It is the case, however, that all children of compulsory school age are entitled to a state-funded school place should they require one, and of all the faith schools in England, around one third are state funded.

We are also supporting faith groups in their engagement with local authorities to explore options for those private faith schools that are interested in joining the state-funded sector. Where there is a sustainable need, local authorities can bring schools serving particular faith communities into the state sector as voluntary-aided schools, and the school must meet all required standards within the state-funded sector. Since the introduction of the VAT policy, we are aware of one private faith school that has joined the state sector as a voluntary-aided maintained faith school, opening in September 2025.

Furthermore, not all income received by smaller faith schools will be subject to VAT. Some faith schools are likely to be less impacted by changes to private schools tax, where some of their income is derived from other sources, such as voluntary donations or support from religious organisations. That is because VAT is out of scope for donations that are freely given and where there is no reciprocal obligation. That means that some private faith schools may be affected proportionately less than others.

All private schools, including private faith schools, can decide for themselves how to manage the additional cost of VAT. There are a variety of ways in which a school may choose to do that. For example, they may reduce their surpluses or reserves, make savings on non-essential expenditure or, like any VAT-registered organisation, reclaim input VAT on their costs.

[Jim Shannon]

Respectfully, it is not about how the schools can do things; it is about the parents who make that sacrifice so that their children can get to those schools. I suggest—the Minister has it in front of her—a simple solution, which is to introduce a VAT registration threshold that is below the state funding benchmark. I understand that the Minister does not have the final say, but my No. 1 request would be for her to ask the relevant Minister whether they would consider reviewing that idea as a possible solution. I think I gave the figures for the savings and costs. If everybody went to state schools, it would cost even more. [Interruption.] I am sorry, Sir Alec, but that is the point I am trying to make.

[Olivia Bailey]

The hon. Gentleman made his case well in his speech earlier, and he makes it again now. The Government have carefully considered the options that he has put forward today. I have heard all of his points and they have been noted by my officials.

Private schools have steadily increased average fees by 75% in real terms since 2000, and that has not affected pupil numbers. Fee increases can also reflect wider cost pressures beyond VAT and business rates.

The Government are closely monitoring the impact of VAT policy on the private school sector. We remain confident in the estimates made when this policy was introduced, which said that the number of private school closures was expected to remain relatively low and influenced by various factors, not just by the VAT policy. On average, 74 private schools, including independent special schools, have closed per year over the past 20 years. However, only 60 private schools closed in academic year 2024-25, which is the school year that the VAT changes were introduced. That means that school closures announced thus far remain firmly within historical patterns and sit comfortably within our expectations. Indeed, even after the VAT policy came into effect, private schools continued to open in England. In the same time period—between 1 September 2024 and 31 August 2025—106 private schools registered and opened.

We are confident that the state sector can accommodate any additional pupils, including any pupils transferring from private state schools.

[Sir Ashley Fox]

The justification for this tax given in the Labour party manifesto was to raise revenue to employ more teachers in the state sector, yet we now know that in November 2025, there were 1,400 fewer teachers than 12 months previously. Can the Minister tell us where the money has gone?

[Olivia Bailey]

I will. I am just coming on to that, if you will bear with me. I am grateful for that. [Interruption.] Did I do something wrong, Sir Alec? I apologise.

[Sir Alec Shelbrooke (in the Chair)]

Order. The word “you” has crept into a couple of speeches today. I am not responsible for any decisions, so please, let us not use it. I give everyone a timely reminder that we do not use the word “you”.

[Olivia Bailey]

It is a very timely reminder. I am grateful to you, Sir Alec. I thank the hon. Member for Bridgwater (Sir Ashley Fox) for his intervention. He raises an important point. I have just skipped through my notes, and I realise that I will not be coming on to that point; I have, in fact, already covered it. I will just repeat that we are managing to increase the schools budget significantly as a consequence of this policy, which has also raised significantly more than our initial estimates. We are also recruiting teachers, on which more detail was published in our schools White Paper earlier this week.

In closing, I once again thank the hon. Member for Strangford for securing this debate, and I thank Members from across the House for their contributions this afternoon. As they eloquently outlined in their speeches, independent schools, including faith schools, make a valuable contribution to our diverse education system. The Government have made necessary and fair choices to safeguard the public finances, invest in our public services and increase funding for our schools. We will keep working with faith groups, school leaders and local authorities to ensure that every child in this country has access to a high-quality education.

15:40

[Jim Shannon]

First of all, I thank the Backbench Business Committee for giving me the opportunity to speak on this issue, and I thank all Members for their contributions.

I thank the hon. Member for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire (Ian Sollom) for his contribution; the Liberal Democrat policy on this issue is quite clear, as I knew before the debate—the Conservative policy is also quite clear. The debate focused on faith-based schools, and it is very important that we consider them in this sector, as I believe they are feeling the pain more than most. The solution that has been put forward should be looked at and taken up, if at all possible. The hon. Gentleman said that 100 independent schools closed in the last year and as many as 26 could close in the year to come, and his last remark asked the Government to look seriously at the financial burdens on schools.

The hon. Member for Bridgwater (Sir Ashley Fox), in an intervention, was very clear that he perceived this—I believe it to be the case—to be an attack on education, and I think he referred to choice of education. Again, whenever we have voted specifically on independent schools, I have been very clear where my vote would lie. I ally myself with the hon. Gentleman and what the Conservative party has put forward.

I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Joy Morrissey), for her passionate contribution; she reaffirmed today what she has said in the Chamber before. She has heard from many parents who, on behalf of their children, want the ability to choose what school they should attend. In my earlier comments, I referred to FORB issues, and I believe what we see today in the United Kingdom is unfortunately an attack on those with faith, whether they are Christians, Muslims or Jews—that is an issue. The hon. Lady also reminded us not to forget the sacrifice that parents make for their children, and she urged us to reverse this policy.

I also thank the Minister for clearly outlining the Government’s commitment to education; she outlined the financial budget and the Government’s focus, as well as the massive SEND issues in both England and Northern Ireland. I know the Minister told me that the Government have considered VAT registration. However, if the funding benchmark is set at £7,690 per pupil, and if all the independent schools were to close, all their pupils would have to go into mainstream schools, which just could not cope. The figures we have presented today indicate that some 270 schools would qualify, and 54,000 pupils would benefit. The revenue loss would be reduced from £1.5 billion to £32 million. I think that those figures indicate an opportunity to review this.

I say that respectfully to the Minister, as it is never my form to attack anyone or run them down—that is just not how I do things. I always try to put forward a solution, and I think we have introduced one today for independent faith schools. I thank all Members and the Minister for their contributions. I also thank Hansard for all the writing they do—I know we all keep them busy.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the impact of VAT on independent faith schools.

15:45

Sitting adjourned.