Lords Chamber

Thursday 18th September 2025

(began 3 months ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
11:07
None Portrait Oral questions: Simplifying rail fares for passengers
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, My Lords, first My Lords, first Oral My Lords, first Oral Question.
11:07
11:08
11:08
11:09
11:10
11:11
11:11
11:12
11:13
11:14
11:14
11:14
11:15
11:16
11:16
11:17
11:18
11:18
11:18
11:18
11:19
11:21
11:21
11:21
11:22
11:23
11:23
11:24
11:25
11:26
11:26
11:26
11:27
11:27
11:28
11:28
11:28
11:29
11:29
11:29
11:30
11:31
11:32
11:33
11:34
11:35
11:35
11:36
11:37
Baroness Merron Portrait Baroness Merron, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health and Social Care (Labour)
-
-
There are a number of points in their which are very helpful ones. Just to reconfirm to satisfy your Lordships House, this is for conditions that may develop to the age of five years old. As with all screening, consent is required. As the noble Lord rightly says, a baby cannot consent, but the parents can. Around the age of 16, the plan is also to be able to seek that consent again from the young person.

And to the point about the storage of data, it is secured securely in a research library run by captain makes England. Access is tightly controlled and overseen by an independent committee and only permitted within a secure environment. If the noble Lord would like more details I would be happy to provide them. Could I ask the to provide them. Could I ask the Minister when the House will have Minister when the House will have the opportunity to develop this and debate this policy around genome debate this policy around genome sequencing given it has such weighty implications for many issues? implications for many issues? The matter of debate within this House of course will be a matter for my noble friend the Chief Whip.

And also members of your Lordships House that may seek to encourage such debate which I would certainly welcome. I can say to the right reverend Prelate that the sequencing of 100,000 newborns through the generation study will be completed by summer 2027. And then the evaluation part of this study will be completed and presented to the UK National screening committee who will then make a recommendation. So subject to all of this, an appropriate funding, genomic testing could be available for all newborns could be available for all newborns by 2035.

So there is a long window of opportunity for the right reverend Prelate.
11:39
11:40
11:41
11:42
11:43
11:43
11:44
11:45
11:45
11:47
11:47
11:48
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:52
None Portrait Business of the House
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Committee and one other motion. Senior Deputy Speaker. My Lords, I beg to move the third report from the procedure and report from the procedure and Privileges Committee be agreed. The Privileges Committee be agreed. The genesis of the changes proposed in the report was a letter from the Leader of the House containing various suggestions to make business more clear and easier to navigate. The changes fall into three broad areas. Questions for short debate. Time limits and deadlines for speaker lists and Explanatory speaker lists and Explanatory Notes's for amendments.

Your committee gave these proposals full committee gave these proposals full and detailed consideration. And in turn recommend these changes to your Lordships. The five proposals related to questions for short debate are intended to provide clarity and certainty for members and provide greater opportunity for particularly Back-Bench Members to ask questions. The first recommendation is increasing the recommendation is increasing the flexibility. To allow them to be taken between other items of taken between other items of business and not just as a lunch break, Dennis -- dinner break or last business.

The second proposal last business. The second proposal is for a trial period, topical QST's should no longer be scheduled for Thursday and instead fall on the reserve list, which is drawn by ballot every five weeks and should be tabled. This reflects the fact the number of entries into the topical ballot has generally been low and indeed on more than 25% of occasions there has been no valid occasions there has been no valid entry. To ensure topicality is not lost, the usual channels will be able to select a debate from the reserve list, which is particularly topical.

If agreed by the house, the impact of this change will be reviewed by the committee by the end of the next session. The third proposal clarifies that only the final item on the order paper should be treated as last business, with the result of a time limit of 90 minutes. The full proposal aims to rebalance the allocation of so backbench and opposition frontbench speakers have a greater proportion of time available. The final proposal would add emphasis to existing companion guidance that they should be limited in scope to ensure that the member in whose name it stands can articulate issues clearly and comprehensively in the time permitted.

The next set of proposals relate to debates. The committee proposes that when Select Committee reports are scheduled for Thursday, they should automatically be time limited to a total of five hours in the same way as party and balloted debates. Thus giving more predictability to timings on Thursdays. These time limits will not apply to Select Committee reports debated on other days. The committee also proposes that speaker lists for debates should close at 5 o'clock instead of 6 o'clock from Monday-Thursday, so members participating are informed of the length of time of their contribution as early as possible.

This has been happening on a trial basis since January and indeed has received positive feedback. The final proposal for consideration is related to Explanatory Notes's for amendments. Where the committee recommends guidance in the companion should "strongly encourage Explanatory Notes's for amendments when they meet the criteria of a report", the committee believes it would be helpful to the House where the meaning of amendments is less clear. Clerks in the Public Bill Office will continue to be able to offer assistance in drafting statements.

As with all changes the committee will keep the operation of these proposals under review. Our intention is as always to assist the smooth running of this house. I will not speak to the section on resignation and powers of attorney. Because it has been superseded by the amendment of the Hereditary Peers Bill, moved by the Leader of the House at the third reading. The amendment will when we get Royal assent, provide explicit statutory authority for notice of a resignation to be given by a person acting on behalf of a peer who lacks capacity.

It will bring a standing order to the House to implement this provision once the bill has passed but until then, no changes proposed but until then, no changes proposed in this area. I commend the report to the House and I beg to move.
11:58
Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Portrait Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Conservative)
-
-
The question is this motion be agreed to.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, could I just mention briefly that I welcome all of the briefly that I welcome all of the provisions in the report? But could the committee turn its mind and attention to the time which we are attention to the time which we are given to consider the issues on Second Reading and elsewhere? The Second Reading and elsewhere? The And the Chief Whip has been excellent in his response is with the bill that comes before the House the bill that comes before the House tomorrow is a private members' bill where we are reduced to four minutes to talk about a highly complex issue.

Four minutes is only arisen because of the action of the Chief because of the action of the Chief Whip, ignoring the rule that we finish at 3 o'clock on Friday. And providing two days for discussion which I very much welcome was a sensible way forward. But sensible way forward. But increasingly we find in Second Reading's of bills we are reduced to Reading's of bills we are reduced to two minutes or less. That is because people put their names down to speak and there is no, could the committee not look at this issue? There are a number of possible alternatives.

It simply makes, the great thing about this House is it does have people who actually know what they are talking about. It also has people like me who do not always know what they are talking about. Squeezing out people engaging seriously because of the way in which the system operates is I think a great disappointment. Given the government has a manifesto commitment to deal with ensuring people participate in this house, I can see that this becomes a bigger problem.

Because people will put their names down to speak and the result will be debates are less informed. Surely this is a matter the committee should turn its attention to?
12:00
12:00
12:00
Lord Gardiner of Kimble Portrait Lord Gardiner of Kimble (Non-affiliated)
-
-
itself, we did reflect that we itself, we did reflect that we needed to have QST's which could be needed to have QST's which could be managed in that time and candidly to have them where the subject of the debate invited so many noble lords, because it was such a broad issue because it was such a broad issue that we thought that was inappropriate, and therefore our inappropriate, and therefore our suggestion is that we want to have them in a way that is manageable, so proposers can articulate properly in proposers can articulate properly in the time allocated and also that backbenchers have time and the Minister in turn is properly Minister in turn is properly questioned in that way.

One thing I would say, because it is a dilemma, would say, because it is a dilemma, is my experience is the House generally likes brevity if points generally likes brevity if points are well made. I have heard some brilliant speeches of three and four brilliant speeches of three and four minutes. I have heard some of 10 minutes which I think we could have minutes which I think we could have had six minutes less of. I think it is about the subject.

I well understand what the noble Lord said, tomorrow and last Friday, there were deeply held opinions. But what I picked up, because I am not allowed to speak, is everyone thought those debates were conducted, even within the short time, with enormous courtesy and mutual respect. As somebody said to me, in a way it was an example of the House of Lords at its best in dealing with issues of this intensity and thoroughly and often in a short time. But I take away what the noble Lord and the noble Baroness has said.

I beg to move.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is this motion be agreed to. As many as are of that opinion, say "Content". Of the contrary, "Not content". The contrary, "Not content". The contents have it. Standing orders, Public Business. Senior Deputy
12:03
None Portrait Business of the House
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Public Business. Senior Deputy I beg to move the second motion in my name. The question is that this motion

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that this motion be agreed to. As many are of that opinion say, "Content". Of the contrary, "Not content". The contents have it. My Lords me now come to some instrument previously debated in Grand Committee. Hovercraft application of enactments

**** Possible New Speaker ****

amendment order. 2025. I beg to move the Motion standing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in my name on the Order Paper. Question is that this motion be agreed to. As many are of that agreed to. As many are of that opinion say, "Content". Of the contrary, "Not content". The contrary, "Not content". The contents have it. Financial Services (Overseas Recognition Regime Designations) Regulations 2025. Lord Livermore.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Livermore. My Lords I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Paper. The question is this motion be agreed to. As many are of that opinion say, "Content". Of the contrary, "Not content". The contrary, "Not content". The contents have it. Data Protection Act 2018 (Qualifying Competent

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Authorities) Regulations Lord Hanson of Flint. I beg to move the Motion standing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in my name. The question is the two motions in the noble Lords name be discussed in the noble Lords name be discussed on block. As many are of that opinion say, "Content". Of the contrary, "Not content". The contrary, "Not content". The contents have it. Global Irregular Migration and Trafficking in Persons

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Migration and Trafficking in Persons Sanctions Regulations 2025. I beg to move the Motion standing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper. Question is this motion be agreed to. As many are of that opinion say, to. As many are of that opinion say, "Content". Of the contrary, "Not content". The contents have it. Compensation for Miscarriages of Justice (Alteration of Overall Justice (Alteration of Overall Compensation Limits) Order 2025. Baroness Levitt.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Baroness Levitt. I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper. The question is this motion be agreed to. As many are of that agreed to. As many are of that opinion say, "Content". Of the contrary, "Not content". The contrary, "Not content". The contents have it. I can leave a short pause before we start the
12:06
12:07
Baroness Blower Portrait Baroness Blower (Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Baroness Minister. Having worked on these amendments with my noble friend Baroness with my noble friend Baroness Minister, and her unavoidable absence from the chamber today, I absence from the chamber today, I shall move 469, speak to 470 and mention 502F. 469 introduced a duty mention 502F. 469 introduced a duty to prepare and make publicly available and assessment of the expected impact of any proposed legislation, policy, budgetary action, or other matter which will have an impact on children.

Amendment 470 provides for a more general duty requiring ministers to consider, protect, and promote children's rights, as set out in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Together, these amendments probe all options in the round. Amendment 502F, broad in scope is commentary. A clear duty to have regard to the UNCRC is preferable to the somewhat vaguer location for the desirability of. Amendment 469 and desirability of. Amendment 469 and 470 which had input from the NSPCC as part of their children's charities coalition, the children's rights Alliance and UNICEF UK, would place a clear duty on ministers to have due regard to the UNCRC.

Although ultimately those bodies will aim for full and direct incorporation of the UN can in law as in Scotland. Three years ago, the British Academy published a report on reframing childhood. It was the outcome of a wide-ranging program shared by my noble friend Baroness Minister. Three themes, each of relevance to this bill emerged. First, being and becoming. This drew attention to the importance of childhood as a state of being of great significance to the child. Second was children's voices and participation.

And third was children's rights, as articulated in the UN conventions. This is missing from the bill. The Secretary of State has argued that this bill represents the importance of understanding and promoting child- centred policy. Key to this is children's rights. They help us value children as children. Particularly those in the most marginalised groups. A children's rights approach could encourage more coherent policy making. These two amendments offer a practical way for government to explicitly enshrine a child-centred orientation in legislation.

UNICEF UK argues that children's rights should be central to plans to improve children's well-being and opportunities, as in these amendments. Having ratified the UN can and, the UK must comply with its principles and standards but, beyond ratification, article 4 of the convention requires states to undertake all appropriate legislative, administrative, and other measures for the implementation of the rights recognised in the convention. The UN committee on the rights of the child has ruled that the development of a children's rights perspective is required for effective implementation will stop in its 2023 report on the UK, it recommended that greater efforts to incorporate the convention into UK law, and the development of mandatory children's rights impact assessment for relevant legislation and policies should be taken.

These amendments would be important steps in complying with that recommendation. They would also bring England closer to the protection of children's rights provided for in Wales, Scotland, and in Jersey. They would add teeth to the government's aim of child-centred action across departments. And facilitate the government's mission led approach in the Opportunity Mission in particular. My Lords, the duty on ministers in 470 would ensure visibility of children's rights and best interests in policy-making. So that their needs and well-being are not overlooked.

In line with article 12 of the Convention, it would mean listening to children so that they are heard and have their views respected. It would help to strengthen the public awareness of children's rights. And in particular to the publication of three yearly reports. The duty could easily be integrated into existing decision- making processes. It is a step that other nations have taken with positive results. A key element of the duty would be to involve mandatory children's rights impact assessments, recommended by the UN committee in its report on the UK.

Would affect Would affect children Would affect children so Would affect children so as Would affect children so as to Would affect children so as to avoid and mitigate impacts. They enable policymakers to identify proactive measures leading to better realisation of children's rights. Evaluations have shown that if these are properly conducted, they are effective in improving policy-making from the children's perspective. There was a comprehensive CIRA provided for this bill but it does read more like an end of process assessment rather than one used from the outset to guide policy development.

The expectation of the development. The expectation of the UN committee is that the CIRA will be part of the development of new policy and legislation from an earlier stage as possible. In response to an Oral Question earlier this year, my noble friend the Minister confirmed that the government recognises the importance of considering children's rights in that way. However, she added, we are continuing to encourage departments to carry out CIRAs when making policy changes. The factor departments does not carry out information on how many are carried out, as you did answer to a written question, shows the government does not know how many are carried out.

In discussing this with my noble friend Baroness Minister, she described trying to get a CIRA published on previous asylum legislation was like trying to get blood out of a stone. And when one finally emerged at the third reading of the Illegal Migration Bill, it was alas inadequate. An attempt to justify measures which undermined children's rights. Moreover when asked about CIRAs, there's a tendency for departments respond by referring to the quality assessments carried out under the public sector duties.

But these are no substitute for CIRAs, which require the children's best interests and rights to be considered. I would urge the Minister to accept the case for mandatory CIRAs that followed the UN committee guidance. Over 115 organisation to support these amendments, representing both national charities and grassroots groups. Spanning areas such as child poverty, disability, youth justice and social care. Over 25 academics have written to the Minister for Children and Families to voice their support. Pointing out it is simply not possible to meet children's needs in any of the areas covered by the bill without first respecting and promoting their rights.

And members of the committee may have received an email from the Children's Commissioners office which states that "It is essential that this legislation includes measures for ensuring children's rights are upheld, hence it is supporting the amendment. If noble Lords can remember back to the committee's first sitting, the noble Baroness Lady Finlay suggested that the purpose of the bill has a golden spite running through it, and it is the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. When reminded of that during the summing up, the Minister said, " We recognise that UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is an important thread.

" But went on to state that does not necessarily mean it can be used as a Trump card in every occasion. Perhaps not a Trump card having ratified the convention, we are obliged to treat children's best interests as a primary consideration. These amendments would enable the government to do so. In closing, I offer the view from Ben, a 13-year-old boy, who watched the second reading debate for the gallery and sent along a thoughtful email. He wrote, " When I saw the amendment the children's rights impact, I was amazed, happy, and a bit shocked because it is such an amazing and huge thing.

It feels like if we had this law, it would be such a huge psychological safety nets. I think it is important that we have it in law. I feel like this bill should be for children and I liked it when it was said, if not now when? " I agree. So if not in this bill, when? Let's not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

disappoint Ben. I beg to move Amendment proposed after clause
12:17
None Portrait
-

62 insert the following new clause, the words printed on the Martian

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I I speak I speak to I speak to the I speak to the amendment I speak to the amendment tabled in my name and thanked the noble in my name and thanked the noble Baroness Richmond who is unable to be here today and the King's Counsel for assisting us with this drafting. The amendment is like 470 albeit differently worded in seeking to give domestic legal effect in a somewhat different way in the somewhat different way in the context of functions by public authorities under the bill to the rights of children contained in the Convention on the Rights of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

As the noble lady outlined, the purpose is that the rights of children need specific consideration children need specific consideration due to the special care and protection often needed. The UK has protection often needed. The UK has been a party to the convention for been a party to the convention for 3.5 decades. It was signed by the Thatcher government in 1990. At around that time Baroness Bottomley, then the Minister for Health said then the Minister for Health said the UK played a legal -- leading role in drafting bad.

Yet the convention has not yet been incorporated into domestic law in incorporated into domestic law in England. As we heard the committee in oversight of the convention recommended it should be and that certain rights are enforceable. In 2011 Wales became the first country in the UK to make the convention part of domestic law, the rights of children in the Wales measure and it has been judged to be a success so far. Scotland has more recently followed suit through the Convention on the Rights of the Child in the incorporation Scotland act of 2024.

Yet England lags behind. This amendment would go some way to addressing that. The amendment does
12:19
Lord Banner Portrait Lord Banner (Conservative)
-
-
The UNCRC in general as it would be outside the scope of the bill and would require further consideration. It would however apply to the It would however apply to the exercise of any functions by public authorities under the bill. The proposed duty is modelled on section 149 of the Equality Act of 2010 at the Public Sector Equality Duty, and it is a duty on authorities to have it is a duty on authorities to have Convention, rather than a duty of outcome.

Thus it does not propose undue burdens upon public authorities. Like the Welsh legislation it contained a requirement for the Secretary of requirement for the Secretary of State to report every five years on how the government has complied with how the government has complied with the duty. I suggest the significance is threefold. First it would be an important initial step on the road important initial step on the road to bringing the law in line with that of Wales and Scotland in terms of legal effect to the convention, of legal effect to the convention, which we have signed up to more than 30 years ago.

Second the duty would 30 years ago. Second the duty would apply to the exercise of any functions conferred under the bill in relation to children, social welfare and schools and all the better for that. Third, it would have the added did importance in accordance with the amendment proposed by Mike Noble friend Lord proposed by Mike Noble friend Lord It would cover early years provision and childcare and keep premises open for in-person attendance during civil emergencies so far as it is reasonably possible.

Those words would engage the regard of the duty under my amendment. The combined effect of the amendment would be that any decisions by public authorities on school closures, such situations would have to be taken with due regard to the UNCRC. The amendments together would provide powerful protections in the future against a repeat of what happened during the COVID pandemic in terms of school closures. The documented effects of which include the highest annual rise of children living with obesity on record. Severe impact on victims of domestic abuse and amplification of differences in attainment between children from wealthy families and those less fortunate and a marked participation of children supporting less curricular activities, self-harm and The government has made much of its commitment to obligations under international law.

Indeed the Attorney-General lectured about that in a few days ago. This amendment would contribute to achieving the objective by giving legal effect to the obligations the UK has long signed up to in the international sphere. I urge the Minister and the House to consider it carefully. House to consider it carefully. House to consider it carefully.
12:22
Lord Carter of Haslemere Portrait Lord Carter of Haslemere (Crossbench)
-
-
I speak to my amendment. It ensures that part two of the bill complies with article two in protocol 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights. Which the United Kingdom not only signed and ratified but has also incorporated into UK law under the human rights act of 1998. My amendment is based on the wording of the second sentence, which provides the second sentence, which provides " in the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and teaching, the state shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching is in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions".

Part two of the bill directly engages this article. Since the government will be in the words of the convention, assuming many new functions in relation to teaching and education. For example, local authorities will be given sweeping new powers monitor, register and regulate the independent sector. The Secretary of State will be empowered to regulate independent schools, arrange inspections, prescribed standards and suspend registration. He or she would be able to make regulations using King Henry VIII power's to dictate which educational institutions are covered and would also be able to mandate for academies using yet more King Henry VIII powers to look at the key stages as well as attainment and assessment targets.

We are well within the protocol. I know that this government takes its obligations very seriously. Without my amendment, these new powers in the bill would impede the right of parents to ensure an education for their children which is in accordance with their own religious and philosophical convictions. Why? Because article two is about parents having the right to choose which education and teaching is right for their children. As the Strasbourg court said, article two protocol 1 aims at safeguarding the possibility of pluralism in education, which is essential for the preservation of democratic society as conceived by the convention.

Our very own Supreme the convention. Our very own Supreme Court recognised this need for plurality in a case in 2020 concerning members of the Orthodox Jewish community. The court stated that their needs are different from And they have a need for their own community facilities, including schools. The same could be said for members of other faiths who choose schools supporting their religious and philosophical convictions. Such as Christian schools. This is all about the primacy of parental choice.

Let me repeat that, it is about primacy of parental choice. Whether it be an academy, single sex school, music school, faith school or a maintained school. Parents must have the freedom to choose an institution whose ethos is in accordance with their own religious and philosophical beliefs and with what they perceive is best for their children. This may mean choosing a school which has freedom to innovate without regulation by the state, so as to promote the skills and talents of each pupil, including varying the curriculum and attainment targets and adapting procedures and schedules with a view to bringing out the best in each and every child.

All of these are the hallmarks of a diverse educational landscape and exemplify the Rights of the Child, as protected by the protocol. At two as it stands would fail to respect such rights. My amendment therefore is surely to be welcomed by all who value fostering the unique talents of our children in an educational environment in a system with a religious and philosophical underpinning as chosen by their parents. by their parents.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, I support amendment 470 and have added my name to amendment 502. However, I would suggest that 502. However, I would suggest that all together more forthright and all together more forthright and comprehensive embedding of the UNCRC into English law is now both into English law is now both appropriate and overdue. Even if that could not fully be achieved that could not fully be achieved under this bill. That convention was signed by the United Kingdom among
12:27
Lord Meston Portrait Lord Meston (Crossbench)
-
-
signed by the United Kingdom among many others as long ago as 1991. It commands widespread respect. Since then, England has fallen out of step with Wales. Whereas we have been told a measure in 2011 placed expressed duty on ministers to have regard to the rights and obligations in the Convention. England is yet more out of step with Scotland, where the convention was fully and directly incorporated into law by statute last year. Amendment 470 would align England with Wales but not yet with Scotland.

Amendment 502 would impose a duty on public authorities, not just ministers. Yet both fall short of unqualified incorporation. The convention provides a wide ranging and valuable list of rights which should be an invaluable checklist for any public authority. Even if some may criticise parts of the idealistic and aspirational, it raises standards and specific articles in the convention would supplement current gaps in practice in procedure and would enhance accountability. Without going into too much detail, significantly it Convention expressly to recognise and underpin a child's right to identity as set out in article 7 and eight.

Not unimportant for migrant and unaccompanied children or in the complexities of modern parental relationships. Article 12 is widely recognised as important in requiring proper consideration of the views of a child on all matters affecting that child. Any family law practitioner can see the potential, general and specific influence of many of the other articles. For example, the influence of disputes over child relocation. More broadly, several topics and problems discussed in the course of this bill and its progress through Parliament are covered by the convention.

Article 24 is relevant to the real problem of poor take-up of vaccination for children. Article 28, school attendance. Article 33, on drugs. Overall, although I would submit these amendments could be more robust, they would be a step two following Scotland. Those supporting amendment 502, I suggest the drafting of the proposed sub clause could be simplified to remove the double negative. An amendment 470 would require publication of report every three years. 502 would require them every five years.

It would probably be better to coordinate the timing of any reports with those required under article 44 of the convention itself. Which may have been what was intended. Scrutiny of such reports is important to ensure that they are not selective and altogether uncritical as can occur. If we are serious about the rights of children, they should be incorporated into law. That should be irrespective of any future formulation of human rights. These amendments should be accepted. As to amendment 502, I'm glad it has been added to this group.

Governments must balance the rights of children and parents with care. All children are entitled to equality of education and opportunity. In a way which broadens horizons rather than narrows attention. Children and parents have rights but parents also parents have rights but parents also
12:31
Baroness Longfield Portrait Baroness Longfield (Labour)
-
-
I thank my noble friend for making such a strong case of why they are important. As former Children's Commissioner who worked very much within the framework, as the legal person required to promote and support children's rights, you would be surprised to hear me speaking out for these amendments. As part of that role, I meet Children's Commissioners and governments around the world and around Europe. They are at different stages of incorporation. And having regard to UNCRC.

But to those who have taken that step towards incorporation, it was very clear from every one of those conversations with senior members of government and others working in the public sector and indeed society as well, that this was an important declaration for the country. An important declaration in terms of what was important. It was how they viewed themselves. I am proud of the work that this bill and the wider work of government puts forward in terms of making children much more a central commitment in decision- making.

I think this would be the next important step. Often the discussion can become quite legalistic and quite technical if you like. That somehow distracts. I think we need to get to the heart of what this is about which is making what this is about which is making sure that we have a consistent focus on how we, as a nation, put our children first. Because we know that what happens in childhood will have an impact throughout the whole of life. And that impact is at the heart of who we as a nation are.

Children don't fit neatly into government departments. There is no one at the Cabinet table that has exclusively the best interests of children to represent. Children don't vote today often get missed out when it comes to key moments of decisions. And of course we know they are most likely to fall through the gaps. In short, it is easy for children to become overlooked and forth through both departments but also decision-makers over policy. Children's rights impact assessments which can strengthen that move.

It does sound quite technical and bureaucratic again, this is about ensuring that decisions are made in the round and these issues are considered. I think we most seriously felt the lack of that during the pandemic, when decisions were made that were not in children's best interests, there was not a framework for that wider consideration. Many departments of course do undertake the impact assessments. I don't think they yet have the status or consistency that is needed across government. What we saw during the pandemic 's other countries such as Scotland and Wales put forward impact assessments on decisions that will be made around children.

Which really looked to consider the wide-ranging decisions from economic issues to issues around schools, issues around health and the like. And ensure that children's best interests had been put into the round and were therefore thought. He did not mean that everything was made that could not be improved. But it did mean there was a consistent framework for that consideration. I think that is what I would put forward for consideration here. That we take that next step to look at strengthening the framework within government, and also within our legal system, that puts children really on a firm footing.

Yes of course during emergencies, but in day-to-day too, so we can take the ambition of putting children first to make sure we do that in all the decisions we make. To ensure we are not holding children back and we do really see their best interests are taken into account.
12:35
Lord Wei Portrait Lord Wei (Conservative)
-
-
I rise to speak to amendment 502YP which stands in my name. It goes to the heart of how government power is exercised under this bill. It requires the Secretary of State when issuing guidance or reviewing parental appeals to act in a way that is fair, proportionate, and consistent both with the best interests of the child, also taking into account the burdens might impose on families and parents. Such provision is necessary because it is not enough for ministers to draft guidance that looks acceptable on paper, or to frame decisions in language that is compatible with human rights law.

What matters is how these powers are created in practice. The impact both parents and children and other stakeholders in their daily lives. Too often, many innocent families I have spoken to experience the gap tween theory and practice. They are told that regulations are light touch and find data requests threatened with attendance orders or subject to investigate reprocessing triggered not by evidence of harm but by initiative suspicion. From my work with home educating families, I hear repeatedly of parents treated as problems to be managed rather than to work with them.

This is coercion disguised as oversight. I understand the approach and strategy of government, as a means to try and block loopholes both now and in the future. But I would urge the Minister and departments to rethink costs that this Henry VIII led approach takes. You are imposing on families, many of them who found themselves on the wrong side of an investigation, and remember many of the majority of investigations don't end with a conviction. They have to pay huge court fees and set aside years of their life to fight for their rights.

Putting costs onto ordinary citizens. This amendment seeks to ensure that courts, in reviewing such actions, will look beyond the fine words policy for real-world effect. Does it impose a burden that is unfair or disproportionate? Does it respect the privacy of parents, under section 7 of the Education Act 1996? Or does it erode by stealth? The principle of substantial fairness is established in case law. The Supreme Court says the interference of family life must be proportionate, necessary and justified by evidence of harm.

In a Birmingham City Council case, the court stressed that suspicion alone is sufficient to override parental decision- making. And in other cases, it is made clear that formal compliance of article 8 is not enough if in practice families are subject to arbitrary or excessive state interference was this is about rebuilding trust. Parents must have confidence that when the Secretary of State issues guidance, it is designed to support not to harass or empower. Not to intimidate. They must know that it is substantive assessment of what is fair and proportionate and in the best interest of the child.

Let's take one example, guardians might have the local authorities can request information as necessary. On its face this sounds reasonable but in practice families have reportedly been asked for intrusive details about their beliefs are private lives, information far beyond what is needed to make sure the child is receiving suitable education. My amendment would mean the court would be obliged to ask not just whether the words are lawful but whether the action is disproportionate in truth. It will consider parental appeals as well.

Without a substantive fairness test, the secretary of state can uphold decisions that technically meets the law guidance that are manifestly unjust such as refusing the registration when a child is in acute distress. And the monitoring conditions that make family life untenable. This amendment requires such decisions will be tested against their effect on the ground. Some may veer that this opens the door to endless litigation. I would argue the opposite. By looking at increased fairness in the outset we give guidance and reduce the scope for arbitrary or heavy-handed action.

This reduces the likelihood of judicial review. It is precisely when parents and families feel trapped, unheard, mistreated that the results to courts. This amendment is not limited to home educators. It will protect all families protected by the bill. And the benefit remains targeted and proportionate rather than bloated with demands. Local authorities often stretched to breaking point, and shielded from the impossible task of enforcing rules. They are unworkable on the ground. It respect the role of Parliament, this place. Often we legislate the assumption that Parliament will interpret and apply the law reasonably.

Guidance becomes overreaching or unfair, people suffer. This amendment restores the crucial check ensuring that actions under the act or bill judged by their substance. Finally I stress that this does not prevent the Minister from issuing robust guidance when children are genuinely at risk. What it does require is such guidance is necessary, proportionate, and can be plummeted without undermining parental family rights. That is the balance struck in our domestic law and in the European Court of Human Rights was not protection where there is evidence of harm but restraint and there is not.

If we pass this bill down such safeguards, we risk abetting a culture of formal compliance that is blind to lived reality full stop we risk measures that look lawful and feel great but feel unjust. In doing so we risk losing the trust of the very parents and families and children whose partnership we need to safeguard children's rights effectively. The amendment offers principal proportionate solution to ensure the law is not just words on paper but fairness in practice. It strengthens oversight, protect families, uphold the integrity of our child protection system and education system.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, I support amendment 469

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, I support amendment 469
12:42
Baroness Butler-Sloss Portrait Baroness Butler-Sloss (Crossbench)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, I support amendment 469 and 470. And particularly the speech of the noble Lady with such experience, Baroness Longfield. I would like to concentrate very would like to concentrate very briefly on listening to the child. In 1987 /88, I chaired the statutory inquiry into the Cleveland child abuse. And I heard with my assessors a lot of videos of children being interviewed. It was extraordinary how even very young children of five or six were able to give astonishingly accurate accounts of what had happened to them, and what they want it done.

The older children were explaining not only how they had been interviewed but how they were wanting their voice to be heard, and it wasn't being heard. In my recommendations, I pointed out that children were people and not packages. But I fear that since 1988, when I wrote the report, that particular idea that children are people, are entitled to be heard, it does not mean they are entitled to have what they want done because it may not be appropriate.

But what they want done is absolutely crucial to be heard. And it seems to me that these two amendments put on the statute book not only part of the rights of the child under the United Nations can, which has been referred to frequently today, this very important convention. And it is a bit odd that we have not actually embraced it fully in UK law. Or English law because it is embraced in other parts of the United Kingdom.

It is very odd indeed. But what really matters is what children want should be heard. They should be listened to, and what they need and what they want should be evaluated. That is why I think these two amendments are so important.
12:44
Lord Russell of Liverpool Portrait Lord Russell of Liverpool (Crossbench)
-
-
My Lords, at second reading I said that with great sorrow for me and many others, Baroness Massey of Darwen is not here with us because she would have been intimately involved in this bill. In particular, she would have put her full weight behind these two amendments. She was a clarion call for the voice of the child to be had. During the last five or six years in your Lordships House, have had a succession of bills.

I include the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act will, Victims and Prisoners Bill, and the Online Safety Act. In each case, in this House, a group of us across the chamber have fought repeatedly to try and inject into the bill the recognition of the rights of children. A recognition that children are not and should not be treated in the same way as adults, and to try and ensure that we inject as much of that into the bill as possible.

In each case this has been necessary because it has become abundantly clear that this was not foremost in the minds of those drafting the bill at that time. If that was embedded in the system, so that what is in the best interests of the child was automatically a major part of thinking hide drafting any part of the bill, what a any part of the bill, what a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have been involved for many years with a charity which is the largest provider of health education largest provider of health education into primary schools in the United into primary schools in the United Kingdom. One of the things that keeps coming up is the issue of keeps coming up is the issue of mutual respect. Respecting children of different ethnicity, faith, of different ethnicity, faith, background and belief and to do that in a considered, thoughtful way. The United Nations is also involved United Nations is also involved through UNICEF in a rather wonderful through UNICEF in a rather wonderful charity called rights respecting schools and for any noble lords that schools and for any noble lords that have not heard of it or been to one, this is a remarkable institution.

this is a remarkable institution. What it has embedded into it, primary schools and secondary primary schools and secondary schools, it embeds into the whole ethos and day to day activities the ethos and day to day activities the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. It is intrinsic within it. To listen to those children who under this scheme children who under this scheme become ambassadors and spokespeople for their rights and that of their for their rights and that of their fellow pupils, it is remarkable to hear their ability to articulate clearly and passionately and also lucidly why this is so important.

Interestingly talking to some of the members of staff in those schools, they tell stories of children going on to university, arriving in university and being horrified when they arrived there to hear some of the views expressed by those arriving from other types of schools who seem to feel they have the right to say whatever they want about Irrespective of rights. This is an example of what the UNCRC can actually do. I was looking at the front page of this bill and was looking at the statement by the noble Baroness the Minister, talking about the human rights act of 1998, saying the provisions of this act, this bill, are compatible with the Convention on Human Rights.

Would it not be wonderful, I thought, if in future in a bill like this underneath that there is a statement which also says that this bill is compatible with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Wouldn't that be wonderful? So I am fully in favour of this. When it comes to amendment 470 and the impact assessment, I speak as somebody who is the victim of many impact assessments. Because I have the privilege of being a member of the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee.

We look at a whole flotilla of secondary instruments in various stages of health or distress. One of the things we always look for in a well drafted, considered statutory instrument, some of which are very important, is Through Explanatory Memorandum. But in particular an impact assessment which is quantitative and qualitative. Which has real weight and substance. All I can say if you read our report, when we draw statutory instrument to the attention of the house, a frequent issue raised is the lack of either an effective impact assessment, or I am horrified to say on some occasions departments not preparing any impact assessment at all and when Prest managed to wriggle out of it and say it is not needed.

That is unacceptable. I think it is particularly important when it comes to issues involving children, it is fundamental we have embedded into our consideration of any legislation or Secondary Legislation which does affect children a considered, thoughtful template to systematically look at the Rights of the Child. When it comes to some of the other amendments, I do fully acknowledge the desire in particular to think about parents. I am one myself. And their belief systems. What I would say is the belief systems of some parents are not entirely compatible with what one might wish or expect to find within our society.

To have a belief system, some of which are wonderful, and some of which most of us would find bizarre or extreme, and then a sense for the parents to feel that they have the right to impose on their child a belief system which many of us might feel is perhaps slightly unfair on the child, I think that is going down a dangerous cause. Ultimately the decision of many parents is heavily subjective. Which is understandable. As parents we do feel a sense of responsibility and ownership for children.

But I do feel we have to balance that with trying to make sure our belief system and the way in which we choose to live our lives does not inadvertently put our child into a position where the experience of the child trying to integrate with other members of society becomes particularly difficult and occasionally unfortunate.
12:51
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle Portrait Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party)
-
-
My Lords, I rise to take part in this rich and terribly important debate having attached my name to amendment 469 and 470 which I note are also signed by the Bishop of Gloucester Andy noble Baroness Walmsley. There is cross-party support there already and we have heard from all corners of the House there is more support for these. It's a pleasure to follow the noble Earl Russel. Even though he did pre-empt... Lord, OK. It is a pre-empt... Lord, OK.

It is a pleasure to follow the noble Lord Russell, even though he pre-empted one of my lines which is imagine having on the front of every bill a statement that says this complies with the UN Convention on Human Rights. What a step forward that would be. I want to go back to comments made by Baroness Butler- Sloss, the noble and learning lady. About listening to children and indeed this is where we started, nothing about us without us. The noble lady made reference to how important it is to listen to children.

I want to pull out the fact that children have really good ideas. Children have a very clear site. It is important that we follow article 12 of the UN Convention and make sure we do follow the right of children to be listened to, to be taken seriously. That is crucial for children with mental health and well-being. The sense of agency is very important. A lack of that sense of agency is I think one of the problems across the whole of society but particularly for children.

Turning around to the other side, children have very good ideas and we are facing a crisis. We are exceeding planetary boundaries. We are damaging our health with the state of the world. Children have ideas with very clear-sighted ways of how to tackle them. Fresh ideas Coming particularly onto the specifics of the impact assessment of 469, I will take us back to 2010 and I declare an interest that I was on the board of the society but back then the society took a review over the lack of assessment on the budget for that year.

In the classic way of these cases, the society lost the these cases, the society lost the judicial review. But it did gain from the government an acknowledgement that there should have been a gender impact assessment on various aspects of the budget. Creating this right is something forcing the government's to think harder about doing the impact assessments we were referring to. This has a real impact. It is not a panacea. It will not fix everything. But it is an important step in making sure questions are asked and carefully examined.

Not brushed aside. We have already heard from one, Children's Commissioner. But I have noted in the last few days that the current Children's Commissioner carried out a national census of school leaders and found schools are To plug more and more gaps with children not having the right to the services they should. Schools are trying to fill in the gaps. I have refer to that because I think there might be people out there listening to our debate to think, well, Britain is a good, developed and successful country and we must be meeting all our obligations under the Convention on children's right but of course we are demonstrably not.

I also point to the fact that our very respected Joint Committee on human rights, chaired by the noble Lord Alton, not currently in his place, is just now starting an enquiry into the human rights of children in the social care system in England. Because they identified there is a problem. I cross- reference back to our debate on the Mental Health Bill. An attempt to deal with the needs of some of the most vulnerable people in our society. We have improved the law there but there was broad agreement we have not got the resources to actually deliver the improvement in the law.

Ensuring that we are signed up to this convention is absolutely crucial. I'm also going to briefly cross-reference an earlier amendment of mine. Calling for a duty Local Authorities. One of the perhaps less noted elements of the convention is article 31.1 which says you recognise the Rights of the Child to rest at leisure, engage in play and recreational activities appropriate to the edge of the tyre Jacques child. -- Appropriate to the age of the child. Looking at the human the child.

Looking at the human rights law review in June 2025, it set out how we can deliver on that. That is taking a global perspective but still very relevant to the UK. I am going to come to my final point which is actually a very large point. Taking a global perspective and thinking about where the world is today. This is particularly relevant today in the light of a certain state visit now ongoing. As the noble Lord Banner said, signing up to the UN Convention was something done by the Thatcher government.

This is something which had been a principle of respecting human rights and the rule-of-law and something which has been embedded within British society over decades. If we look on a global scale, human rights and the rule-of-law are under threat. Like never before. And what had previously been leading countries defending to at least a degree human rights are now stepping out and expressing opposition to them. We often heard from the previous government and we hear from the current government a desire to be world leading.

Wales and Scotland have been world leading here. It is time for England and Westminster to time for England and Westminster to step up. This matters terribly practical reasons of human rights and the rule of law and impact assessment and all those things within the UK. It also matters on a global scale if we are going to say human rights and the rule-of-law applies to all citizens. I think we refer to the right of a child's identity. I was thinking of the Ukrainian children kidnapped into Ukrainian children kidnapped into Russia.

Being denied their identity. Standing up for this, we cannot stand up for this unless we stand up on our own soil. This is a globally important debate and a crucial one for the children of England.
12:59
Baroness Spielman Portrait Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
-
-
My lords, I'm going to speak to amendment 469 and 470. I recognise they are proposed with the best of intentions. At first glance they do sound wonderful. Yet I'm afraid it is obvious they would be likely to do more harm than good in practice. They clearly embody a fundamental misconception that children have no real rights in the UK except to the extent they are specified in charters and conventions. This is not the case. We have a long and generally positive history of acknowledging and protecting human rights.

Including those of children and recognising the ways in which children need to be treated differently from adults. We do an enormous amount to give children a voice stop I will turn to the negatives. The amendment would create a vast, costly admin of burden with very little additional value. The amendments specify the rights of children and impact assessment would have to be published for every ministerial decision, including operational ones. Scotland and Wales have been repeatedly cited as models to follow.

Yet it is genuinely hard to find ways in which children in Scotland and Wales are doing better than children in England. It is easy to find ways in which they are doing worse. I'm afraid the educational comparative studies on record are there for all to see showing big gaps. If we look at the impact of lockdown, they were no less harsh for children in Wales and Scotland. All countries experienced a spike in persistent absenteeism after lockdown. Whereas the latest figure in England is I think 23%, when I looked it up a couple of months ago for Wales and Scotland, in Wales it was 31% and Scotland 37%.

I may have got them the wrong way round but one is 31 and one is 37. It is not obvious those two nations provide any obvious example of why we should Secondly, we should acknowledge that any good government decision or action requires balancing some worthwhile upsides with at least some downside. It is unrealistic to believe otherwise, that there are decisions that are all positive, with no downsides. The prolonged legal disputes about whether this balance is right in the context of a particular decision would often leave real children suffering, while protracted arguments to face over their heads.

-- Took place over their heads. Childcare is not to verbal and we should not treat it as if it was so. And I do wonder if the proposers have been reading the news over the past few weeks. We do not over the past few weeks. We do not have to look far to see where the kinds of wishful thinking reflected in these amendments are making this country all but ungovernable, as many serious commentators are observing. And contributing to widespread anger and social unrest. We really should not be looking to put another log on fire.

We should recognise that the public at large, once governed by Elected Representatives Bill and not by human rights lawyers. And it is increasingly obvious to the public at well-intentioned supranational conventions can themselves over time become politicised, be reinterpreted and even weaponised. So, sadly, I believe these amendments can be interpreted as reflecting what has to be described as an elitist desire to thwart democracy primitively where it does not it with that elite's worldview. Right where it does not fit.

This chamber should always want to protect moxie, not to undermine it.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm standing up to make a speech absolutely on-the-fly now. I have
13:03
13:05
Baroness Coffey Portrait Baroness Coffey (Conservative)
-
-
incorporate various treaties that go into domestic law. The reason I say that is just the experience in a variety of ways of having been a minister. And I would say straight away, 1.6 of the Ministerial Code, which is not a new obligation Ministers, is to basically comply with the international agreements. Which governments and some previous government have entered. And usually ratified by Parliament. So, it is ratified by Parliament. So, it is already embedded into how policy, frameworks, strategies are deployed in order to think about these sorts of issues, particularly about children.

And I'm just thinking in terms of, from the mouths of children, it is in the Psalms, it is in the Gospels. And it is that element of truth that comes through. It is absolute vital that children's voices are heard. This is why things like the 1989 children act is really important, about aspects of that. But I'm really concerned and share the concerns expressed by my noble friend, Baroness Spielman, but about whether or not these need to be incorporated into a whole domestic law.

There are only a handful of other countries who have done this, Iceland, Sweden, Norway, Spain. And to some extent or to full extent of the devolved powers, the Scottish Parliament has decided to do the same. Although noble Lords may be aware of the rulings when there was a referral to the Supreme Court, which removed certain aspects of that legislation. Partly because it counteracted primacy of this Parliament in regards to legislation and other matters. In terms of thinking through though, the noble Baroness Lady Blower, I fully respect her long connection with education, both my parents are teachers, I do not have children, so I do not have the same experiences, but I am aware, when I was Secretary of State the work and pensions, absolutely how much, just by the DNA in effect of being human beings we would consider aspects of the impact on children.

But in terms of the noble Baroness Lady Longfield said, the difficulty about the conversations, they get you listed, that is the whole point. We are talking about law. If I think of amendment 502G, with their been a different ruling perhaps with the Michaela Academy recently, about whether somebody can pray at school or not. I think also of keeping schools open. I know there is an element of it being discussed in another amendment that I would encourage the people who have been distinguished general secretaries of Unisa.

Everything perhaps a parent starting to sue schools for not saying open when there is some snow, the snow may not be stopping the children getting to school but might be stopping some of the teachers, so the decision then is closed and education for whole day or more. Not on behalf of the children but because you cannot get some teachers that. And so you start getting into the whole point I made the reference about legalistic, that is where you start getting into disputes, going to court, trying to settle outside, all these other issues.

And that is why I completely understand and it is why ratifying the treaty was so important. But that becomes a guidance, becomes a framework, it became a natural way of doing things, but it then does not become necessarily and we have actually I believe incorporated certain parts of the convention into domestic law. It does not then become a straitjacket, in effect, of how we kind of evolve in terms of policy. There are risks and I know there has been another Supreme Court ruling trying to discourage judges and indeed people from bringing judicial reviews trying to change policy, but that is exactly where we get into issues that we can see in other legal cases that are often in the courts.

And I respect obviously the distinct legal -- distinguished legal experience of Lord Hart of Haslemere but I would have thought that public sector equality duty recognising religion or belief, would already capture that, what he is trying to incorporate in his interpretation or his amendment, rather. So, I do not want to delay the committee to much longer but I think it is a case of be careful what you wish for. What is it that has happened for children that now makes this necessary to do? The children were ignored by when they were being groomed, when they went to the police.

Children have been ignored in other situations. That grooming is still ongoing and hopefully the police are more alert and CPS as well. But I think going back to the substance, I think the way the UN CRC has been effectively incorporated into how we go about our affairs as Ministers, as Parliament, as public servants, I hope that should be sufficient. But I will continue to try and understand the deficiency that we are trying to address by this wholesome incorporation of this into

**** Possible New Speaker ****

our domestic law, when I genuinely do not believe it is needed. May I quickly respond to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

May I quickly respond to the noble Lady. During the 14 years that her party was in office, I witnessed her party was in office, I witnessed at first hand, because I got re- at first hand, because I got re- elected back in 2014. There have been a series of bills, some of which I mention which I have been which I mention which I have been involved with, where children are directly involved and affected. And directly involved and affected. And repeatedly those bills, after as per usual minimal scrutiny down the usual minimal scrutiny down the corridor by design, it arrives here, corridor by design, it arrives here, it is manifestly clear that the detailed needs and requirements and rights of children have not systematically been thought through systematically been thought through and embedded in the legislation.

and embedded in the legislation. Which is why we have had to go through lengthy debates to try and tease that out. And I'm proud to say that in the majority of cases, faced with strong cross-party arguments in favour, the Frontbench of her own favour, the Frontbench of her own party repeatedly, indifferent bills, exceeded to the strength of those exceeded to the strength of those arguments and amended the legislation to put the children's right in there. So whatever the Ministerial Code may say, unfortunately that was not filtering its way down through into the way the bills were being drafted.

Your Lordships' House did its work very well. But I suppose what some of us are hoping for and asking for is a situation where that requirement becomes less frequent. And is abnormal, rather than, I am afraid,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

substantively normal. I would say in return, I was trying to keep my speech brief, I hear what the noble Lord has said hear what the noble Lord has said and I have heard he... That is and I have heard he... That is because we have had a lot of stuff about legalism and I'm giving direct experiences and I appreciate what the noble Lord has said. I could the noble Lord has said. I could give more examples. Would it start to become...

One of the reasons children get a flu vaccine every year is primarily to protect adults, year is primarily to protect adults, the teachers, the school workers, to the teachers, the school workers, to stop the spread of FLOW. It is not really to help the kid. So there are all sorts of things that happened today. -- The spread of flu. There are all sorts of things today that are all sorts of things today that are actively encouraged to be done to the child in a way that should be harmful.

Coming back to the harmful. Coming back to the legislation and the point I think that is relevant. And it may be... that is relevant. And it may be... The Department of Education, the Secretary of State for education has the leading responsibility to have the leading responsibility to have that horizon scanning of every bit of legislation that affects children. If there have been children. If there have been deficiencies, then I recognise that. I'm not convinced incorporation of law into domestic law is going to be the way.

To achieve that necessarily. But I would encourage the Minister in her reply to perhaps give confidence, even if the last administration that the noble Lord feels was deficient, I'm sure that the current administration will say they are very much on top of it. But frankly, it is a bit like when I was at DWP, I had primary responsibility for disabilities. So was my job, working with my officials, to keep scanning legislation about how an impact people with disabilities. That was not always very popular with other departments who kept telling us to keep our noses out but that is what we did.

And that is what I'm sure the Department of education is intended to do. That said, I know my noble friend, Baroness Barran, was assiduous in her delivery of supportive of children and I'm sure the noble

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Baroness for the government will continue to be so as well. Can I respond to a point the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I respond to a point the noble Baroness covey made -- noble Baroness covey made -- Baroness Coffey made, the wording in Baroness Coffey made, the wording in my memory is not my wedding, it is in the convention, I'm not to incorporate into law, it already is, incorporate into law, it already is, that ship herself. Under try to that ship herself. Under try to point out its relevance in a build that I perceive is seeking to restrict parental choice in various restrict parental choice in various ways.

That ship has sailed. If I could pick up a one point the noble Lord Russell me, I entirely respect Lord Russell me, I entirely respect what he is saying about the importance of to be aware that parents may make wrong choices. But parents may make wrong choices. But the assumptions built into this provision of the convention is that provision of the convention is that they are entitled to make good choices as well, what they consider to make good choices. Otherwise you to make good choices.

Otherwise you would take away all rights of parents altogether if you make the assumption they are not... And children's rights respecting schools, it is their parents who

**** Possible New Speaker ****

have chosen to send them, that is the parental choice. Responding to the noble Lady about vaccination. I think it is very important we put facts on the record about vaccination. The noble Lady suggests the vaccination of children was primarily to protect other age groups. I've just been looking at the... Flu vaccination, sorry, yes. I have just been looking at their health and security agency website about vaccination of children against flu. And it says, "Flu can be an extremely unpleasant illness in children, with those under the age of five being more likely to be hospitalised due to flu than any other age group." Vaccinating children helps protect them in the first instance, so they can stay in school.

So I think it is important, given the debate around vaccination, that it is put on the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The analogy with the ECHR is not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The analogy with the ECHR is not well. The human rights act poses duties of outcome, it requires adherence to the Convention. The amendments before the committee amendments before the committee require regard to, which is a world apart from duties of outcome. If it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

apart from duties of outcome. If it is too burdensome to have regard to the connection, what is the point of the amendment? The point about vaccinations, I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The point about vaccinations, I think it is important. I think... I do believe children should have do believe children should have vaccines, I think we should prosecute parents, potentially, you do not give children the MMR vaccine because of the potential of that. I'm not saying that as a policy I would adopt overnight, but it is would adopt overnight, but it is worrying so many children do not have the MMR. But it is a broader have the MMR.

But it is a broader point, it will be written in other aspects, but I am aware that this is a primary element of trying to reduce the transmission of flow. I have no doubt that if children get flu it can be serious, it can be serious to any individual. That was one of the driving forces and why it is aimed particularly at children in primary schools. But it is widely available and significantly designed This has been a very important debate on these amendments. I want to start by, Baroness Walmsley is not able to be present, her husband is not well and she had an amendment 469 and 470.

I am going to keep my comments brief. I think you were right, I can see Baroness Massey on my shoulders, when I first arrived here, although she was in a different party, she immediately collared me and said right, and gave me everything on children's rights. me everything on children's rights. That was the first time I met her. In some ways, at some stage when we come to our senses on this, it will
13:19
Lord Storey Portrait Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
be probably her importance on this be probably her importance on this issue will come to mind. I also want to mention the point that Baroness to mention the point that Baroness Butler-Sloss made about the importance of the child being heard. importance of the child being heard. For far too long, we have the old adage that children should be seen adage that children should be seen and not heard. Sadly, that filters through the whole of society in all through the whole of society in all sorts of ways, not just parents, not just public bodies.

I remember my wife being absolutely heartbroken wife being absolutely heartbroken when, in her secondary school, a when, in her secondary school, a black boy was fostered with white black boy was fostered with white foster parents. And at the time it was quite rightly the case that culturally it is better if you can foster with the same heritage for foster with the same heritage for that child. The boy he was 12 or 13 was absolutely adamant that he was absolutely adamant that he wanted to stay with his white foster parents.

Nobody listened to that parents. Nobody listened to that boy. Nobody in the local authority and nobody in the school, nobody in social services listened to that boy. If we say we want to hear the voice of the child, it is a nice phrase to use, but in practice we have to make that work and has to filter through the whole of what we do. In terms of the Convention of human rights, I do not understand this. I would like, perhaps in a detailed letter, I would like the Minister, it is 12 years, I think, when Baroness Walmsley and Baroness Massey talk to me about this, why we cannot follow Wales and Scotland, let's do an impact assessment.

Why do we not want to do it? If we want to do it, what are the reasons why we cannot do it? I would like to know that. Perhaps the Minister, when she replies, she could tell us? I do not think I have anything else to add to what I thought was a wide-ranging discussion. I think it is absolutely crucial. The clue is in the title, the Children's Wellbeing Bill. If we are talking about the Children's Wellbeing Bill, anything we do, anything government does in terms of legislation should look at the impact on children in the future.

That seems to me to be eminently a sensible move. I hope that government either now, or if it is brought back at report stage, will support amendments 469 and 470. I was tempted to, as we sometimes say, respond to Baroness Wyld men, but I cannot agree with your comments. Perhaps now is not the time to do that, perhaps we could have a private conversation on some of the things that got me quite a tank's D, to be honest.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Please -- please let me thank
13:23
Earl of Effingham Portrait The Earl of Effingham (Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Please -- please let me thank noble Lords. This is a technical area and we have heard expert opinion from Lord Banner, Lord Carter, lady Longfield, Lady Butler-Sloss and, crucially, in our opinion, from the former chief opinion, from the former chief inspector of education, Lady inspector of education, Lady Spielman and Lady Coffey. It is important to flag that whilst His Majesty's loyal opposition understands the spirit of noble understands the spirit of noble Lords's amendments, we are not in a Lords's amendments, we are not in a position to support them.

The UK already signed and ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1990 and 1991. And it came into force in January 1992. As such, into force in January 1992. As such, the UK is already bound by international law to implement the agreement and our progress is being monitored by the Committee on the Rights of the Child. But several of the recommendations in the last report from the committee, including in relation to child rights assessments, and in relation to education, once we did not support education, once we did not support when we were in government and we still do not support in opposition.

Amendment 469 would bring in an additional child's rights assessment into all legislation, as recommended by the committee in their 2023 report. We simply do not believe that this is required and will, in fact, instead of enhancing a child's education, further slowdown our ability to legislate and implement effectively. The wider recommendations in the report are also not proposals with which we concur. Including, for example, the recommendation to end academic selection and testing measures to reduce levels of stress on pupils.

This has the potential to do real harm. Particularly to disadvantaged pupils. We believe that that huge opportunity before us is not to layer on new statutory duties or reporting mechanisms. It is to ensure that the education system we strive for is one that builds on the successes of the last 20 years, aided by noble Lords on all benches of your Lordship House. An education which offers each and every child the opportunity to realise their full potential.

That should be the The amendments in group one, as we have heard in a well-informed debate, relates to duties on ministers and public bodies in ministers and public bodies in respect to parents rise -- and parents rights to educate children in line with their faith. The government are committed to government are committed to safeguarding children in law and practice and with the Convention on the of the child. I'm grateful to noble Lords on their views on these matters and for the opportunities to hear from experts in this House.

We have listened carefully to the arguments from these amendments and will continue to engage closely with all of those advocating for the rights of children. We regularly meet, for example, with an expert advisory group to hear directly from key stakeholders in this area, including the children's rights including the children's rights allowance for England, Barnado's and allowance for England, Barnado's and several others. This group will be meeting again in the department next week. We have regular meetings with week.

We have regular meetings with all of the children's charities. all of the children's charities. This provides ministers to hear first-hand from experts on these issues and helps us with our shared goal of putting children's rights at the centre of policy-making. I know my honourable friend...
13:27
Baroness Smith of Malvern Portrait Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
-
-
And grateful to the noble Lady the Minister. The sheepmeat groups

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of children? -- I am grateful. Does she meet groups of children? I have barely started. I will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have barely started. I will come to that. -- as we have said come to that. -- as we have said already in the range of this bill, there are a range of ways the government engages with children on government engages with children on the specifics of legislation and the specifics of legislation and more broadly. For example the wide- ranging engagement that has been led by colleagues in the department of Culture, Media and Sport as well as Culture, Media and Sport as well as DfE and department of health on the youth strategy, for examples, where a large number of children have been engaged.

I was just about to say engaged. I was just about to say that my honourable friend and the former Minister engaged readily with these key stakeholders and asserted, as do I, and I am sure is my new colleague would do also, that the fundamental importance of children's rights to this government. We are rights to this government. We are also carefully considering the issues and amendments around the rights and voice of the child that rights and voice of the child that have been raised in part one of the bill earlier on in committee to ensure children's rights are protected throughout the bill.

Amendment for six and nine in the name of Baroness Lister and introduced by Baroness Blower, would place a duty on ministers to prepare and publish a child's rights impact assessment in relation to all relevant legislation, policy and budget developments in the act that would impact children's social care or education prior to the action being taken. On the children's rights assessments and more broadly on the UNCRC, the government has put children at the heart of our mission to break down the through our plan for change.

Ministers already consider the impact of our children's rights responsibilities children's rights responsibilities in all new policies and legislation. And through this landmark bill we are delivering the most significant reforms to child protection in a generation. By improving safeguarding, strengthening social care and ensuring vulnerable children do not fall through the cracks, we are already putting children and families first. We did, for this bill, published children's rights impact assessments for all measures. We are working hard in the department to deliver what Baroness Longfield emphasised, which is to improve the status of children's rights impact assessments and we need to develop their culture and the hearts and minds to ensure that is delivered across government.

That is why we are continuing to work with policymakers across government with policymakers across government to carry out CRIN as to analyse the impact on children. The apartment have worked with civil society experts to develop a robust template. -- Department. We will continue work with children's rights experts to promote children's rights across government and upskill officials on the importance of considering children's rights in policy-making and how best to Whilst I recognise the importance of this work, assessment should be effective and proportionate.

Each department should remain responsible for considering where these are required. And to place a duty on all government departments to complete and publish child right impact assessments for all decisions which affect children with the a significant and challenging undertaking. And we do need to consider not only the way in which we incorporate children's rights in our legislation and decision-making but also how we use scarce resources to do and to deliver as well as to report.

Such a duty, furthermore, proposed here, goes further than arrangements for culpable -- comparable assessments, such as Equality Impact Assessment and environmental principles assessments. There is an important toolbox of ways in which policymakers can be rightly driven to consider the rights of children, as the rights of equality and environmental. -- Environmental principles. We need to be aware of how we use that to box across government but we do not believe it is right to incorporate this in statute in the way which this amendment would suggest and require.

amendment would suggest and require. Turning to amendment 470, also tabled by the noble Lady, my noble friend, Baroness Lister. In a similar vein this amendment would place a statutory duty on Ministers to have due regard to the UN CRC in exercising functions relating to children. On ratification, the government made a commitment to give due regard to the UN CRC when making new policy or legislation. Just to be clear, the slight implication from some noble Lords appears to be that somehow or another we are operating out with the requirements of the UN CRC.

Just to be clear, we are fully committed, as I have said, to children's rights. And the continued implementation of the UN CRC, to make the convention a reality for all children and people living in the UK. Article 4 of the UN CRC recognises that implementation of the rights in the convention may be achieved by a legislative, administrative and other measures and since ratification in 1991, implementation of the convention has been pursued through legislation and policy initiatives, including very importantly through legislation such as the Children's Act 1989 and their Children Act 1994.

And I believe this ambitious bill demonstrates how we will advance children's rights. Turning to amendment 502F in the name of the noble Lord banner, that would place a statue duty on public authorities to have due regard to the desirability of exercising functions under this act consistently with the requirements under the UN CRC. Further to the points I have made already about the Government's commitment both to children's rights and the UN CRC, there is a wealth of legislation that ensures compliance with the convention.

And within our report to the UN, every five years, we review, rightly, the extent to which existing legislation implements the UN CRC. Should this reporting process highlight a need for further legislation to fulfil our obligations, we would of course review this. Turning to amendment 502G, in the name of the noble Lord Carter of Haslemere, this amendment seeks to... Any part of two from applying should a conflict with our parents ability to operate within their own philosophical convictions.

I will assure the noble or, as we have declared, the provisions within this Bill are compatible with the Convention rights. We have published an ECHR memorandum. We have also I think covered quite a few of the issues that the noble Lord raised, with respect to part two of the Bill already. In debate. And I'm afraid I do not I set his characterisation either of the Government or of the bill. -- Do not accept. Bill supports parents rights to educate children in accordance with FA.

We demonstrate this through our support for faith schools operating with the state and in the independent sector. As I previously made clay, part two of this Bill is not aimed at unreasonably restricting these rights, rather it aims to provide parents and children with a core guarantee of quality education and ensure safeguards are in place for all children. It does not prevent children from receiving education in accordance with the tenants of their faith provided that the education is suitable and safe. We continue to suitable and safe.

We continue to support and uphold those rights for parents, but importantly, for children too when it comes to safeguarding and ensuring their ability to have an appropriate and excellent education. Finally, amendment 502YP, tabled in the name of the noble Lord Waco would require the Secretary of State when issuing guidance or reviewing parental appeals to act in a way that is substantively fair, proportionate and consistent with the best educational interests of the child. We do not believe this amendment is necessary for several reasons.

Firstly, primary legislation is neither appropriate or proportionate in this case. Ministers are required to comply with the public law principles of acting reasonably and following a fair and transparent process. In any event, consideration by the courts will be more broad than the wedding and stated intention of guidance and policy in determining human rights compliance. Secondly, we must be wary of unintended consequences. The best educational interests of the child will not necessarily always be the first priority in all guidance and determination of appeals arising from this bill.

As a course in its scope encompasses areas other than education, for example, it is possible there could be well-being or safeguarding matters that override educational interests in some circumstances was thirdly, where this Government consults with children and people and where we assess potential impacts of new policy and interventions on the very people they are intended to serve, including through child rights impact assessments, I can reassure noble Lords that these processes are neither superficial in their intent or execution nor are they intended to shield actions from judicial review.

For example, as I already identified to the noble and learned Lady Baroness Butler-Sloss, the Government's National Youth Strategy engagement process has in fact developed into a very meaningful coproduction process with young people and the sectors that support them, with over 14,000 young people be able to submit their views through the process that we have undertaken. That is the right way for government to ensure that children's voices are at the heart of the decisions that we are making.

Equally, we will continue our work to ensure that child rights impact assessments will be delivered across government and that children's rights and interests will be at the heart of decisions made by this government. This has been an important discussion but I hope that noble Lords will feel suitably reassured by my responses to feel able to withdraw their amendments.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is both a pleasure and somewhat of a challenge to respond
13:39
Baroness Blower Portrait Baroness Blower (Labour)
-
-
somewhat of a challenge to respond to this extremely good and wide- ranging debate. Might I just say I'm extremely grateful for dimensions of our late noble friend, Baroness Massey, whose absence from this debate we all feel quite deeply. Can I just say that I would thankful noble Lords who have spoken, even those with whom I disagree, and never before have I been described, I do not think, as being motivated by an elitist desire to thwart democracy. When seeking to advocate for children's rights.

However... The contributions I thought were all extremely interesting and I'm very pleased to have had the support of my noble friend Baroness Longfield, Baroness Butler-Sloss, Baroness Bennett and I particularly want to mention Lord Russell, who spoke both about the need and I think this is really important to balance parental choice and children's rights. This may not occur often, but it may occur, and we do need to pay attention to that balance. And also his mention of the extremely wealthy and really good rights respecting schools in which children can begin to advocate for themselves and understand what children's rights really mean.

So, on the question of children's voice, I think need the children's voice in the care system, as mentioned by the noble Baroness Lady Bennett, is also important. I could mention everybody. I will not be tempted into a discussion about academic selection, even though it is something on which I can say a very great deal. But I am pleased with the remarks of my noble friend the Minister, for her to have seven the Dispatch Box that she is fully committed to children's rights stop -- to have said from the Dispatch Box.

On children's rights assessment and the possible incorporation of the convention I'm sure we will continue to talk but at this stage I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

beg leave to ask the question standing in my name on the Order Paper to withdraw the amendment. Is that your Lordships pleasure that this amendment be withdrawn. that this amendment be withdrawn. The amendment is by leave withdrawn. The amendment is by leave withdrawn. Amendment 470. Not to move to. -- Amendment 470. Not to move to. -- Amendment 470. Not to move to. -- Not moved. Amendment 471. Not moved. Not moved. Amendment 471. Not moved. Not moved.

Amendment 471. Not moved. Amendment 472. Not moved. Amendment Amendment 472. Not moved. Amendment 473. Not moved. Amendment 474. Not 473. Not moved. Amendment 474. Not 473. Not moved. Amendment 474. Not moved. Amendment 475. Not moved. Amendment 476, withdrawn. All 77 and 478 -- 477 and 478, not moved. 478 -- 477 and 478, not moved. Amendment 479. Not moved. Amendment Amendment 479. Not moved. Amendment 480. Not moved. 481. Not moved.

482. 480. Not moved. 481. Not moved. 482.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Not moved. Amendment 483. This amendment aims to remedy one

**** Possible New Speaker ****

This amendment aims to remedy one of the greatest injustices in the whole educational system and that is the acute shortage of the acute shortage of apprenticeships for young people not going to university. If you qualify going to university. If you qualify for university and you want it, you can expect to find a place. If you qualify for an apprenticeship and
13:43
Lord Layard Portrait Lord Layard (Labour)
-
-
want it, you have no such luck. The fact is that on the government's matching scheme for apprenticeships, only one in three of all people applying find a place. There is actually a more shocking fact, and I think this is one from which all thoughts about postschool education should start, by age 18, one in three of all our young people have ceased to receive any education or training. That is one in three. That one in three is of course nearly 2 in three of the people not going to university.

That is how we are treating them. They are either NEET or daring dead-end jobs without training, heading for low productivity and low pay. -- Or they are in dead-end jobs. The main culprit is the shortage of apprenticeships. This situation is a disaster for the economy, and major reason for only -- for our low economic growth and a disaster for young people. It is a prime duty of the state to get everybody off to a proper start in life and we seem to be failing, we are not doing it.

We have talked about this problem for years but the scale of apprenticeship opportunities for school leavers today is no better than it was in 2009. However, in that year, the last Labour government took a major step to remedy the situation. They passed the 2009 Apprenticeship Act, that oblige the government to ensure there are enough places for all 16 to 18-year-old qualified applicants for apprenticeships up to level 3. That would have changed everything, of course, but unfortunately, it was almost immediately repealed by the coalition government.

And what amendment 403 does is essentially to re-establish that principle. However, is it feasible? And by It would take some time to implement, let's say four years, in that final year it would cost roughly an extra 500 million. This is 11 percent only of the proceeds of the growth and skills levy. And under skilled young people surely deserve no less than that. It is they who should have the first call on that money, the levy money. Incidentally, the government would get all of that money back within 16 years because of the higher taxes and lower benefits that the young Through their better skill.

However, there is one key question. Can employers be induced to supply enough extra places? The childhood personal development recently did a survey of employers to seek out answers to that question. In replies, 86 percent of employers said they favoured the proposal we are discussing now. Many said that if it were past, they would provide more places. It would require and infrastructure to make that happen -- and infrastructure, Local Authorities will be required to assess the number of apprenticeships, just as they would for school places.

And would have staff devoted to the supply of apprenticeships. These are details which were not covered in an act and were not suitable and they need not be in this one. However, I can imagine a Minister would like to discuss with us the question of the feasibility of this proposal. We would very much like to engage in that conversation with the Minister. Turning to amendment 483A, the 2009 at rightly concentrated on improving the supply of apprenticeships up to level three and no higher.

So does this amendment, it aims only to reduce major disadvantage. I apprenticeship may be a good idea but they are not what this proposal is about. What it is about is one of the greatest problems facing this country. The desperately low level of skill in our employment graduate workforce. The last Labour government had the courage to tackle this through making the care commitment which they made in 2009. We desperately need today's Labour government to make a similar commitment.

I do believe that if they did so, they would be cheered by millions of young people and their parents up and down the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

country. I beg to me. Amendment proposed, after clause 62, insert the new clause is printed 62, insert the new clause is printed in the marshalled list. Amendment in the marshalled list. Amendment

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in the marshalled list. Amendment 480 3A, Lord Lucas not moved. I will move Lord Lucas's amendment in my closing remarks. I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

would like to me that formerly. Amendment moved formally. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Amendment moved formally. The Amendment 483, A, Amendment 483, A, the Amendment 483, A, the question Amendment 483, A, the question is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Amendment 483, A, the question is this amendment be agreed to. I think we are yet to have a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think we are yet to have a discussion on this amendment as part of the groups. Perhaps we can proceed to that discussion before

**** Possible New Speaker ****

moving forward? I wish to speak briefly in support of amendment 483, which I put my name to. My noble friend set out the arguments very eloquently. I
13:50
Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court Portrait Lord Macpherson of Earl's Court (Crossbench)
-
-
out the arguments very eloquently. I would like to add the perspective of a former Treasury official. Economic growth or lack of it lies at the heart of the country's problems. Without it, we will not be able to afford the cost of an ageing afford the cost of an ageing population, the government will be forced to raise taxes even more than it already has an Public Services it already has an Public Services And alienate an already alienated electorate. There is little the government can do to promote growth government can do to promote growth in the short-term.

Britain's economy is likely to grow only as fast as is likely to grow only as fast as the global market permits. The government can do something about the medium and long-term. We know what drives growth, good infrastructure, competition, infrastructure, competition, innovation, sensible tax system, and above all, skills. Successive governments have done a good job on governments have done a good job on governments have done a good job on education. The attainment in schools have improved and over the last 50 years there has been a dramatic expansion in university education.

expansion in university education. Which for the most part has been reflected in living standards of graduates. But that still leaves 50 percent of school leavers who do not go to university who are poorly go to university who are poorly served by a education system that compares badly with competitors. Technical and further education has never been prioritised sufficiently. The media, government and Civil Service are dominated by graduates. Technical education is not sexy, it lags in terms of impact of the reform are long and variable.

There are not many votes in it. But sometimes governments can do the right thing for future generations. I welcome recent announcements by the government of a Youth Guarantee and extra support for skills in the spending review. But it needs to go further. An apprenticeship guarantee provides a golden opportunity to make a step change in provision and to long-term economic performance. I recognise that money is hard to come by. But the Treasury is an economic ministry as well as the finance ministry.

It needs to positive announcements to offset the gleam in the forthcoming budget. I will encourage the Minister and her department to engage actively with the Treasury. It should be possible, for a sample, to tweak the apprenticeship levy to give it a greater youth focus. But if the money cannot be found now, perhaps the government should at least set out a timetable. If it cannot set out a timetable, it can at least sign up to the objective. As the noble Lord said, the previous government passed the apprenticeship action 2009.

It can be done and I action 2009. It can be done and I call the Minister to act.
13:53
Lord Deben Portrait Lord Deben (Conservative)
-
-
I think this is a rather crucial amendment. The reason is that we are a nation which is inclined to talk about education as if it is always academic education. If I have criticisms of previous government, and I have of both, it is that we have emphasised university education as if it is the only way, rather than part of a grouping of educational opportunities. We also are rather inclined not to support technical education and comparison with our competitors is notable.

It is also historically very long- standing. I read recently a report of a committee of the House about such education. Remarking that Prussia was better at it. You will see how long ago that report was produced. We have always found that a difficulty in the way that we think about things. Many of the changes that we have made, like the insistence that polytechnics should become universities if somehow or other that improves the circumstances and there was something less good about something specifically aimed at talking about the issues we are discussing.

We really do have two change the atmosphere. And I much approved of the comments the noble Lord has just made about what the government could do. If he does not have the money, although there is quite a lot of money in the fund which seems to have gone back to the Treasury rather than being used in quite the way one would have hoped, but the fact is if they do not have the money, it is very important to make this statement that this is important.

That it is part of the way in which we help those who need their help, but once having had it, will be making a real contribution. Which is why I come back to Lord Layard when he said the Treasury will get the money back. There is a truth in this. We need it. We have not had it. It was a pretty late decision of that Labour government. Even though it were, afterwards, for reasons I myself cannot remember, changed by the coalition government.

But what I do think is important is that we should recognise that this is an essential part of the modern educational system. We have not got it, we ought to get it and the government needs to come to terms government needs to come to terms with the change in the way in which we do this.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I would like to add a comment to this point, we are not going to this point, we are not going to redesign apprenticeships on the floor of the House, but I would like floor of the House, but I would like The emphasis the noble Lord placed on a 16 to 18-year-olds and bring to your Lordship attention the strange your Lordship attention the strange anomaly in the way we approach this. When a young person fails to get an apprenticeship and remains in full time education of some sort, this is time education of some sort, this is paid -- Automatically.

Part of classroom-based education until classroom-based education until someone is 19. However apprenticeships or 16 to 18-year-
13:58
13:58
Lord Storey Portrait Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

To reinforce what has been said, Is on spent gets return to the Treasury. Not to be spent on education or apprenticeships. But it is a double whammy because is a double whammy because businesses, seeing the fact that their money has not been spent and is likely to go back to the Treasury, suddenly start putting

**** Possible New Speaker ****

staff on high level courses, equivalent... This is risky because I'm doing this from memory, but I appreciate this from memory, but I appreciate in earlier years there was significant amounts of money returned to the Treasury but in the last year that we were in last year that we were in government, it was £11 million. Basically, absolutely everything was Basically, absolutely everything was spent. I would say that into my noble friend's remarks and I hope Lord Storey would put that in context.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

context. You are right, the amount not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

You are right, the amount not spent or did not go to the Treasury

**** Possible New Speaker ****

is coming down. That is right. Of the many millions of pounds that were raised through the apprenticeship levy, the amount that apprenticeship levy, the amount that was not spent on apprenticeships and was not spent on apprenticeships and was returned to the Treasury was £11 million in the last year, as I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

million in the last year, as I remember it, that we were in government. The point I was going to make was

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The point I was going to make was that companies, businesses, who had not spent the levy did not want to see it returned to the Treasury, see it returned to the Treasury, were using it not to be for level three apprentices, but for high level, master level apprenticeships. That surely cannot be the right thing to do. That is not in the spirit of apprenticeships. I was quite shocked in my city of Liverpool that Liverpool city council which had an apprenticeship scheme over a two-year period returned £1 million of money to the Treasury, when that money could have been spent on level three apprenticeships.

The noble Lord made all of the statistics at the beginning but we really need to ensure there is money for level three apprenticeships. That was the original hope of apprenticeships, it will go for those young people who really desperately needed to have

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The issue of apprenticeships is really relevant to the life opportunities of young people. I do respect what the noble Lord layout respect what the noble Lord layout has done in laying this amendment and it has got many distinguished
14:01
Baroness Coffey Portrait Baroness Coffey (Conservative)
-
-
and it has got many distinguished people supporting it. -- Lord Lenard. One of the things that should be recognised by your logic is the introduction of T-levels was intended to provide in a more controlled atmosphere rather than young people, children, going out to work. But going into a different area of perhaps provision of education. That the T-levels, which by the way required a ministerial direction issued by my right honourable friend Damian Hinds, because it was against the advice of civil servants, is a good way of trying to make sure that young people get that opportunity without necessarily having to be necessarily for stint of the world of work.

I am may be over interpreting the noble Lords amendment. -- Forced into the world of work. I think the other issues employers face is that balance of how you treat children in your workforce and how you treat adults. And that, in my experience at the Department for Work and Pensions, was a key difficulty in consideration of how we encourage young people to get into work. I'm noting that the amendment is very specific about between the ages of 16 and 18. In terms of what my noble friend Lord Lucas has put, raising up to seven, I think there is an element of how perhaps young people can then qualify as solicitors and the like by embarking on this.

I also somewhat agree with what the noble Lord Storey has said, that scheme started to be developed that were effectively skewing a way from perhaps some of the entry roles that we still need young people to get into. And this is the very issue which, regrettably I think, due to the Employment Rights Bill, we are seeing the opportunity for young people kind of get less and less. people kind of get less and less. And it is a real worry for me that despite the best intentions of the government, we will see NEETs I'm afraid going up, rather than going down.

So I support the sentiment of the amendment that the noble Lord has raised today but I think you'll be difficult to fully put into practice what he wants but I encourage the government to continue to do whatever it can to make it a straightforward as possible for young people to get apprenticeships. But more importantly, for employers

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to be able to take young people are as apprentices. I rise as is a design technology

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise as is a design technology teacher, veteran of the IfATE field an officer of the APPG or apprenticeships and a member of the apprenticeships and a member of the House of Lords special committee on social mobility. I think we are all agreed that apprenticeships are vital to this country and it is rather sad that it seems to have led rather sad that it seems to have led to an exit from the chamber but. I to an exit from the chamber but.

I think it is more because it is lunchtime. I really welcomed the defence Industrial Strategy and its new apprenticeship and graduate new apprenticeship and graduate clearing system, which I know BAE Systems were behind driving. And we Systems were behind driving. And we have seen Skills England start and have seen Skills England start and we hope that this is the answer. I think this is an incredibly think this is an incredibly important and nuanced subject. And I do not think these amendment in this Bill, I'm afraid, are the answer.
14:04
14:05
Lord Addington Portrait Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
difficult giving the work, especially the small... The SMEs. especially the small... The SMEs. They find it difficult. They are where you would expect to find most where you would expect to find most of those apprenticeships, especially at the entry level, going through. And most people have sort of said yes, it is a problem stop T-levels yes, it is a problem stop T-levels aborting that they have... You have got to try and find, if I remember got to try and find, if I remember correctly, you have to work with an employer during that and that is proving difficult.

Or has done in proving difficult. Or has done in the past. Why are they proving so the past. Why are they proving so difficult? Because it is a bit of a mess. We have got boards and things out there for careers guidance going out there for careers guidance going through, local and national and things going through. We need clearly to give more emphasis on clearly to give more emphasis on making sure people know where these opportunities are, how you're going opportunities are, how you're going to support them, how you are going to get through.

A general duty as to get through. A general duty as proposed in this Bill, something proposed in this Bill, something inside me says as written, it is an invitation to Henry VIII powers and possibly Henry IX intent as well. But still the fact remains that we have not got this right. There is have not got this right. There is some valiant efforts but we have not reached in across bringing those people who actually want and would benefit from having apprenticeship to those who will give it to them.

There just is that problem. I would hope that when the Minister comes respond will get a better idea of how it is going to work. The levy has, shall we say, had its problems, would be a generous way of putting would be a generous way of putting it. But the Minister really has an opportunity to tell us how they are going to develop this. Because it should be remembered that for the client base, many people who have not been that academically successful, and when the noble Lord even commented before, I think just about everybody agrees with him.

But the fact of the matter is that schools are judged by GCSEs and A- levels, that is the passport -- path forward, everything else is a secondary option. Seems to be the culture. Government me a child to change that -- governments may have tried to change that I do not think they have succeeded. How the government is going to do here to get these more practical based operations in. I would also say and it would be remiss of me if I did not, have a look at the English and maths qualifications on these.

I refer again as somebody with dyscalculia, with 14 fails at the Functional Skills in the apprenticeship. We did some work and the pity the noble Lord Nash is not here because we managed to get some consideration in English and we bought the original bill forward, as both he and I scare -- bear the scars of that process and I thank him taking on his own Civil Service and government to take that. Any minister who is prepared to show that degree of courage will always get my support.

But I would hope, even if an idea of how we are starting to address very accepted problems of getting people into apprenticeships. Things that should be attractive to those who have not been great successes in the conventional stream of education or the normal cultural acceptances of it, what we are going to do. Because we need to, not only for the nation and general economy but for those people who are the clients.
14:09
Baroness Barran Portrait Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
I really welcome this debate on the value of high-quality apprenticeships at all levels, with a focus on levels two and three in amendment 483 in the name of the noble Lord Layard. And 483A, which I am moving on behalf of my noble friend, Lord Lucas. I thought Lord Layard predictably gave a very, very insightful and expert analysis of the issues, particularly for young people who are not going to university and painted, sadly, an university and painted, sadly, an accurate but rather bleak picture.

As the... And I would agree with him, rather than I guess on this case is noble friend Lord Macpherson, but I think there would votes in it, I think the noble Lord would be very popular across the country to move in this area. Anyway, that is not perhaps for this House to worry so much about. And I do feel as I make my remarks that I have two former colleagues, one sitting on each shoulder, Gillian Keegan as the first member of the Cabinet who had previously been an Cabinet who had previously been an apprentice.

And Rob Halfon, who saw apprenticeships as a key part of what he described as the ladder of opportunity, which I think is exactly the kind of image and vision that the noble Lord Layard set out. And the previous government did a huge amount of work to raise the quality of apprenticeships and to expand them from some of the more traditional areas, including into financial services and others, to better mirror our very heavily service based economy. And crucially, to support important areas of the public sector where we have significant workforce shortages.

And that is of course in part where level 7 apprenticeships did come in. I know that one of the points my noble friend Lord Lucas would have made had he been here was that level 7 apprenticeships also contributed to that parity of esteem and the sense that apprenticeships could have the same prestige as a could have the same prestige as a degree qualification. I absolutely recognise the urgency to address both the high level of youth unemployment, particularly after recent figures which show how much it has risen in the past year, but also to give all young people a sense of real opportunity, which of course an apprenticeship can bring.

And we have an concerned at some of the changes the government has introduced so far, shortening the length of apprenticeships and removing the funding for apprenticeships at level 7. So I suppose what I will try and argue, and maybe it is easier from this side of the Dispatch Box than the other, is that this should be an area of both and. So level 2 and level 3 apprenticeships clearly fulfil a different role in the economy from those at levels four, five, six and seven, but they are no less important.

One is not more important than the other. And I know that when we were in office, we are a particular concern about levels four and five. So I would be very interested to hear the Minister's reply to the noble Lords Amendments. And I hope that she can reassure the House that the Government is can -- is committed to continue with the employer -related standards rather than the frameworks the previous government introduced. And that further moves will be made to secure the engagement of small and medium- sized enterprises in their use of apprenticeships.

I thought the noble Lady Baroness Wolf is no longer in his place -- no longer in her place, made an important point about how to fund expanded apprenticeship offer at levels two and three. And I also very much recognise the comments made by my noble friend Baroness Coffey, in relation to T-levels. And I guess my reflection on that is that these changes take a great deal of time to embed. I do not think I have met someone, in visiting schools, who has not been thrilled to be doing a T-level.

I visited many schools where children wanted good, high-quality technical and vocational options and were not even aware that T-levels exist. So I think the very least the Government is going to need to do these things in parallel and I hope very much we will hear a positive response from

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the Minister. Can I just start this discussion
14:14
Baroness Blake of Leeds Portrait Baroness Blake of Leeds (Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I just start this discussion by saying although there are a smaller number of noble Lords in the chamber, I think the quality of the contributions has nevertheless been truly significant. I would have course first of all like to thank my noble friend, Lord Layard, for bringing this to the chamber and for of course continuing to share his enormous expertise and passion in this area. And of course nobly supported by the noble Lord Macpherson.

I really do want to emphasise that this Government absolutely understands the issues about the importance of apprenticeships, the absolute scandal of reduced opportunities for young people. And absolutely is fully engaged in discussions on how we are going to address this and move forward. I think the important move forward. I think the important issue to notice is that we really do see working in this area is one of the key levers in breaking down the the key levers in breaking down the barriers to opportunity.

As Lord Deben so ably expressed, it is absently shocking, the lack of opportunity for so many young opportunity for so many young I think his comments in terms of emphasis on academic qualifications emphasis on academic qualifications as well made. It's an issue on how successes measured and we need to reflect on that as we move forward. I have a personal story to tell and this is a local ward member in Leeds, a grandparent came to my surgery very concerned about his grandson and said there did not seem to be the opportunities, he was not getting the help.

I started trying to talk to him about the apprenticeship route and he said no, I do not want my grandson to go down the dirty rag group that I went down. I think there is an issue about this, about stigma, about promotion, making sure that everybody gets the adequate information to promote apprenticeships, whether the young people themselves, parents and people themselves, parents and carers, teachers, do we know how much they are engaged in this area? I think it is critical. We really do, I think the emphasis I'm going to stress on this is about rebalancing apprenticeships back towards young people who have the most to gain from them.

But the rate of starts, we have to be honest, have fallen dramatically over the last decade. We cannot get away from that. We cannot dress it up. The performance has not been good performance has not been good Of growth deals. The other point I would emphasise is that where relationships are built locally around this, bringing together employers with education providers, with young people themselves, that is going to see that success and things really starting to move forward. I am very interested in the discussion about the Treasury.

I would say the decisions be made by this government are not on a cost saving basis, as I think has been highlighted, but the Treasury does have a significant role to play in encouraging growth and recognising the impact on the coffers of the Treasury and being successful in that area. And of course the new foundation apprenticeships are absolutely critical in moving this forward, including across the whole reach of construction, digital engineering and manufacturing. There is nothing more powerful than meeting the MD of a company that started off in that company as an apprentice who can give that first hand, real lived experience of how the opportunities just went up off the scale and how grateful they are for the opportunity to engage in that space.

That is why, to support businesses to make the most of these new apprenticeships, the government will provide £2000 to employers for every foundation apprentice they take on and retain. In the industry. And also, we are offering a range of additional financial support, including £1000 payments to employers where they hire apprentices under the age of 19. Two specifically pick up on the Baroness's comments, the government does pay full training course for apprentices aged 16 to 21, and certain eligible apprentices aged 20 to 24.

Just picking up on the debate and the discussion about the repayment of the budgets, I think Baroness Barran stood up and intervened on this very point. Just to highlight the fact that over the past two financial years, the English apprenticeships budget has been almost fully spent. So, that is something to bear in mind. I think the point I want to emphasise in response to this particular amendment, which is seeking to ensure every eligible young person aged 16 to 18 in England should have the opportunity to do so, whilst I think that is a great aspiration, we have to remember that apprenticeships are jobs first and foremost.

Therefore it is fundamental and critical that we fully engage with employers to make sure we gain their confidence and they have the ability to decide when they can offer apprenticeships to meet their skills needs of their operations to make sure, in that regard, the apprenticeships created are sustainable. Of course it goes without saying that ministers are always happy to engage with my noble friend on these matters as we move forward. Just picking up on the amendment 483, A, B by Baroness Barran on behalf of Lord Lucas -- moved by Baroness Barran.

We recognise the importance of level seven apprenticeships, I think specifically he was interested in architecture, I have personal experience, we got to a point where every single legal business in Leeds were offering apprenticeships. It was remarkable, talking to them, in terms of their experience of apprentices going in from school and how they were so far advanced in comparison to the graduates going in later. I think we have some real opportunities to really talk about how we need to celebrate and, again, as I said before, trying to undermine the perception of the second class status of apprenticeships.

Absolutely fundamental. We have the evidence to get across. But I have to say in response to this amendment, the government believes it is absolutely vital that we prioritise public vital that we prioritise public funding towards those at the start of their working lives and at lower apprenticeship levels rather than those already in work with higher levels of prior learning or qualifications. That is why from January, young people under 22 will be the priority for level seven apprenticeships. We will no longer be funding those older learners.

We encourage employers to recognise their success and many of them already contribute to that. But this is actually building on the enormous breadth of work done by Skills England and the evidence they brought forward through their analysis of official apprenticeships statistics and engagement. We understand that some level seven apprenticeships are popular and well used by employers. Therefore we are encouraging employers to invest in upskilling their staff over 22 to level seven when it delivers a benefit to the business and the individuals involved.

I hope I have managed to convey our absolute conviction that the apprenticeships are a vital part of our journey to creating more opportunities for young people. There is an enormous amount of work to do in this space and I'm pleased the government is putting steps in place to achieve the right outcomes. For these reasons, I would kindly ask noble

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lords to withdraw their amendments. I am most grateful to everybody who has been speaking in this who has been speaking in this excellent debate. The noble Lord got us off to a good start on the us off to a good start on the economics of it. That is of course a economics of it. That is of course a central part of this. The economics central part of this. The economics is, can appear to look just at the whole economy, rather than the face whole economy, rather than the face of individuals and ultimately the economy is about the fates of
14:26
Lord Layard Portrait Lord Layard (Labour)
-
-
economy is about the fates of individuals and especially the fates of these young people who are headed for such lives of poverty and also in many cases inactivity, that causes mental restlessness. I am very grateful for what I think is the main theme that came out of almost all of the contributions from Lord Stephen, Lord Storey, Lord Addington, Baroness Barran, Lord Woolf and Baroness Coffey and others, that we have taken our eyes off the needs of the young people at the lower levels of skill.

How to get people to level two and three is the top priority for the use of the levy money. What has been happening is that the levy money has been increasingly diverted, I would say, to supporting older people, often already existing employees, to higher levels of qualification. That would be alright if it was not being diverted from the needs of young people whom employers have been turning their backs on increasingly. That is what we have to reverse. That requires a major policy decision by the government and the setting up of a major administrative structure to reverse it, the whole trend.

I think it is encouraging that the survey by CIPD shows employers are up for this if there is some leadership and support given to make this come about. What we are worried about is that the levy is being diverted. We should revert to the principal that its main purpose is to get people at levels two and three. When it comes to levels four and above, there are many other potential sources of funding. There is the student loan, it is not so obvious that essentially the obvious that essentially the taxpayer, through the levy, is funding the higher level education for people taking level four and five or degree apprenticeships at level six.

When most of the people standing at levels four to six on standing at levels four to six on student loans. Alternative source of funding if the employers want to get a person quickly, they can be contributing to the cost. We must re-establish the idea that the central, first overriding claim on the levy is for young people doing levels up to level three. I'm very grateful to the Minister for what she has said and the sincerity of the concern about all of this.

I would very much like to meet and see how this can be carried forward. And in the light of that, for the moment, I would like to withdraw

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this amendment. I thank the noble Lord but I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the noble Lord but I think first we are debating 483, A, the amendment. I think I need to ask Baroness Barran if she with withdraw Baroness Barran if she with withdraw the amendment? Withdrawn. The noble the amendment? Withdrawn. The noble Withdrew his amendment. I think they are all withdrawn. 484, Baroness Bennett is not here. Not me. Lord Bennett is not here. Not me. Lord Jackson of Peterborough, 485.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Jackson of Peterborough, 485. I wish to speak to my amendments,
14:30
Lord Jackson of Peterborough Portrait Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Conservative)
-
-
before I do, may I concur with and support amendment 502, YM, in the name of Baroness Billingham, which is a clear, sensible contribution to my amendments. The principle behind my amendments is simple and goes to the heart of the rule of law. They are not mere suggestions, they are the rules which must operate. They must be properly followed. That requires accountability when those laws are broken. My amendments seek to provide a mechanism for holding schools to account by enabling a tribunal to rule where there are allegations that the law is not being followed.

Since the people that are best placed to know what is going on in schools are amongst, others, parents. It is parents who are the centre of the system he would give them a fair, effective and accessible means of redress through an expanded role for the First-tier Tribunal. Which already has a role in education in relation At present we have a system that is not fit for purpose, it is the system that disempowered the very people whose half education has been provided, parents.

It should concern all of us, parents or not, that the system these vital legal duties uninvolved and unenforceable. We spent hours debating the menu Shire of educational and the Department issuing statutory guidance yet it might all have little impact on the ground because there is no easy mechanism to hold schools accountable when they ignore those laws and that statutory guidance. The avenues for enforcing that law either do not exist or lead to a dead end. The schools Inspectorate Ofsted might seem the obvious backstop yet its role is fundamentally misaligned with this fundamentally misaligned with this task.

It's inspectors are by profession teachers, not lawyers, and they are not equipped to make legal judgements on statutory duties. And they are challenged about raising certain scores as outstanding when they are in breach of their obligation Ofsted's defence is that it is not a compliance driven Inspectorate. That may come as a shock to noble Lords but that is how it sees itself. So any hope we might have that is requiring schools to require with laws for misplaced goes out the window. What about the court? In theory a parent could seek a judicial review to Forss a school to comply with the law.

But let's be realistic, for the vast majority of families, this is simply not an option. The crippling legal costs put this beyond the reach of anyone but the most wealthy. And what parent would embark on such an at server process knowing the potential damage it would inflict on the relationship and their child's school. A relationship that they may need to maintain the years to come. So judicial review is in practice a remedy on paper but not in the real world. The remaining root is for parents to escalate a complaint to the Department of Education.

This is one of the problems I want to highlight because the department has become a black hole, a place where parental complaints go to die. Consider the case of Susan, a pseudonym, parent governor who questioned her school over the lawfulness of its proposed RSE policy. When her concerns were sidelined, she was told by the Head Teacher that her only recourse was to submit a formal complaint as a parent and so she did. She detailed how one other lesson plans adopted by the school instructed pupils to plot their gender identity on a spectrum from trousers to tiaras.

Pupils were then asked to add... To add to this their personal identity mind map. Quote. It declared Alan compromising terms but -- it declared uncompromising terms that no one else can tell them what their gender was and said people must always be treated by their self- declared gender. This is Stonewall Orthodox, not shared values, it is political indoctrination, not education and potentially it even raises safeguarding concerns. Having exhausted the schools internal process and got nowhere, she escalated her complaint to the Department.

The DfE said its target response deadline is 15 working days. 14 months later she got a classic civil servant response, which told her that the core of her complaint could not even be considered by the Department. This was despite this being a school that was engaging in highly controversial practices on one of the most divisive issues of the day. In breach of the law or political impartiality and of guidance propagated by the DfE itself. Consider also the experience of another parent, Emma.

Her complaint centred on the presentation of contested gender theory as fact and age inappropriate relationships in sex education materials in a primary school. Please forgive me, but I need to be playing in what these pupils were told to do. To working groups using Play-Doh to make a model demonstrating a condom catching seamen from a Venus. This was a primary school. And it was following a scheme developed by the company established by the local authority. She from a Venus. Having escalated her complaint to the DfE, Emma chase them for response, she was told the evidence she submitted worse had likely been submitted to a premature destruction, that is a new way of describing being shredded.

Even after resubmitting everything, the Department's final response, which did not uphold her complaint, arrived a year after her initial submission. By then her daughter had already left to attend secondary school. Does anyone believe this is an acceptable state of affairs. That parent acting in good faith have serious concerns about their children education should be met with such bureaucratic inertia and incompetence. The consequences are corrosive. It allows important legal provisions, not least a duty of political impartiality, to be ignored or sidelined.

This is particularly acute when it comes to the teaching of contested topics like gender identity, where parents raise legitimate concerns that activist agendas are supplanting balanced education, with potentially harmful impact on the development of children. This failure of enforcement creates a vacuum which allows activist groups to misuse state school system to advance their own agendas and at the same time allows suspicion among parents to fester without definitive resolution, this surely undermines trust in schools. These amendments offer a practical and proportionate solution.

They do not open the floodgates, they create a specific targeted right for a parent to appeal to the First-tier Tribunal but only after the schools own process is complete and only when the complaint concerns a breach of a specified legal duty, such as the duty of political impartiality under the education act 1996 or the general duties in respect of the curriculum. The precise powers and procedures of the tribunal would be set out in detail in regulations made by the Secretary of State and would have course be subject to effective parliamentary scrutiny.

Crucially, these amendments introduce a duty of disclosure. No longer could the school withhold teaching materials from proper scrutiny when a complaint is being considered stop this simple measure would bring a vital dose of transparency, helping to prevent secretive approaches to sensitive subjects. And incidentally, as noble Lords will know, I did support my noble friend Lord Sandhurst excellent amendment for six example 67 the other evening. Which also provide for clear and proportionate solution for the problem of solution for the problem of transparency.

-- 466 and 467.... Over time a body of judgements would emerge, providing greater clarity for parents, teachers and governors alike stop this in turn would lead to greater objectivity, more good practice and help to reduce complaints in the long run. As I conclude, these amendments are a defence of the rule of law. They give teeth to the will of Parliament and will better equip the Secretary of State to ensure the Government's own policies are given effect. They seek to re-establish a proper chain of accountability.

I asked the noble Lady the Minister to consider this proposal in the constructive spirit in which it is offered. And this means a fix for a broken system, to restore parents trust and to ensure that the law of the land is upheld in every school. I beg to move this amendment.
14:40
Baroness Spielman Portrait Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
-
-
Amendment proposed, article 62 insert the new clause parental

**** Possible New Speaker ****

complaints, maintained schools, as printed in the Marshalled List. I'm speaking to amendment 502YM

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm speaking to amendment 502YM standing in my name. And I will echo some of the comments made by Lord Jackson from my noble friend Lord Jackson, in relation to his amendment and I believe my amendment compliments the comprehensive final compliments the comprehensive final stage procedure he has outlined very stage procedure he has outlined very neatly. Anyone who works in education knows how problematic dealing with complaints is becoming. dealing with complaints is becoming. Of course it is right that public bodies should have a complaints bodies should have a complaints procedure, as is required by law.

Of course dissatisfied parents should course dissatisfied parents should be able to complain to or about a school. Schools failing in their responsibilities should rectify their errors and omissions promptly. But the current system is complex and in the main giving satisfaction and in the main giving satisfaction to no one. And I will remind noble Lords that complaining to government Lords that complaining to government is typically 1/4 line action after a is typically 1/4 line action after a series of stages. First, attempting to resolve the issue with a staff member at most directly involved, such as a classroom teacher.

Second, escalating the issue or making a complaint to the head teacher or another school leader. There, making the complaint to school governors and forth, escalating a complaint to the local authority or the Academy trust. And yet the numbers of complaints to government has grown enormously in recent years, but there is not that much evidence of a corresponding deterioration in the service offered by schools to children and parents. It does seem likely that it is at least partly down to a higher propensity to be dissatisfied in a more fractious world.

And furthermore, the use of AI enables parents to generate extremely lengthy complaints which are time-consuming to read and investigate and respond to. Safeguarding will often be invoked to ensure a complaint is prioritised. The various provisions in law relating to the consideration of complaints by national education bodies generally require that local routes have been exhausted. The expectation was that escalation international bodies was a last resort for when serious concerns are ignored or mishandled by those more directly responsible. Sadly what we see today is an increasing willingness to escalate even relatively minor issues if the school's response has been anything other than doing exactly what the parent wants.

And where more serious concerns arise, such as those pointed out by my noble friend Lord Jackson, the sheer volume can mean that more serious concerns are drowned out by the volume of really very minor complaints. And furthermore, the patchwork of law and regulation often mean that any complaint must be considered in all the places to which it is sent. Each of the Government organisations has a different purpose and will apply a different filter to determine whether it needs to act. But all of them must take the time to read and understand what are often long and complex documents and often must check with the school to establish facts.

This is a huge burden on schools, as well as being a wasteful model for government to operate. And it does not appear to be making parents any more satisfied. I think we need to reset the system and return to the expectation that the vast majority of complaints are considered and closed at local level. My amendment, therefore, proposes that a single government complaint system is established which can triage and direct complaints to the most appropriate body. Or reply to the complainant to say there is no further action to be taken.

There would need to be discussion about whether this should discussion about whether this should be located. If it was desirable for such decisions to be made with substantial school experience it might be Ofsted, otherwise it might be a DfE team. Either way, the complaint and action taken should be recorded in a single database, accessible to all bodies with regulatory functions, including inspection. So as to minimise duplication with all the burdens that that imposes. And I believe such a system should reduce the wear and tear on parents themselves pursuing complaints is very, very dragging and damaging to parents and their relationships with schools.

As well as the wear and tear on schools from protracted and inconclusive complaints processes. In short, I think this is a pragmatic amendment that would benefit almost everyone.
14:45
Lord Storey Portrait Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
I have a degree, well, not a degree, I understand where these amendments are coming from. And I personally have not formed a complete view about this. I understand what you are saying and I'm looking forward to hearing Ministers reply. Because I think there's an issue here and it is how we handle that issue. Education has become a very successful business for the lawyers, to be quite honest. You only have to look, dare I say, in terms of special educational needs, where the lawyers have made, the solicitors have made a lot of money.

I declare an interest as my daughter is a solicitor. You also see lawyers, solicitors, involved in the school's admission procedures now. In some cases that is the natural route to go to. And I just wonder in terms of complaints, never mind the bureaucracy involved, whether lawyers getting involved in that side as well. So it seems to me that first of all, sometimes schools are very good, I have to say, at responding to complaints. They try and look at it as how dare somebody make this complaint about the school.

Where, if they have perhaps the training or perhaps resources or the school had the right ethos, they could respond straight away and deal with the problem, nip the problem in But I also know from experience that if you are a parent and you have a serious complaint, we have heard some examples of those, the system currently is not fit for purpose. You cannot have public bodies, you cannot have Department for Education thinking it will just go away all the bureaucracy taking over.

It is damaging for schools themselves. If damaging for schools themselves. If a parent makes a complaint, and the complaint is minor and has been blown out of proportion, sometimes it involves other parents and issues, it can be distressing for the school and cause real worry to the teacher concerned or the head teacher concerned or the governing body concerned. I would be interested to see what the Minister says. I think it is something we need to think carefully about.
14:47
Baroness Barran Portrait Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
This group focuses on the thorny issue of complaints. The amendments in the name of my noble friend Lord Jackson of Peterborough would introduce a new right of appeal for introduce a new right of appeal for parents and children who have made a complaint at an academy... Special school that would not be upheld. Most schools do follow the law and follow guidance and follow non- statutory guidance. I remember one teacher saying to me, we live our lives by the bell, of course we follow the rules.

But I absolutely accept the examples my noble friend has cited and we do know that the volume of complaints is rising considerably, assisted by tools like Chat GPT and other large language models. We have, as Baroness Spielman said, in relation to the amendment to which I was pleased to add my name, that a complaint can be made to the Department for Education, to Ofsted and the TRA, as well as the school itself. Most worryingly, the school is sometimes excluded and complaints are made to all of the other agencies are not the school.

I'm grateful to the charity, parent kind, for their research into complaints, which shows, of course, that the vast majority of parents are happy with their child's school, but it also shows that 38 percent of the parents in the sample interviewed had filed a formal complaint in the last year and the head teachers report, separately from the research, that they are dealing with five complaints a week. As Lord Jackson explained, his amendment would support parents who are not satisfied with the school's response to a complaint and would provide a different mechanism for enforcing their legal duties.

I find it troubling that my noble friend is amendment is needed, particularly the second element where there are significant safeguards to ensure schools meet their legal duties. But I would have hoped that the existing system which allows a complaint to be referred to a panel chaired by an independent member would be sufficient. But I think the House will agree that my noble friend has raised some extremely worrying examples, including what might be insulting to snails, the pace of the response they have received from the department itself.

Turning to the amendment in the name of my noble friend, Baroness Spielman, as my noble friend has already set out, this aims to simplify and streamline the complaints process. We are trying to address the current problems where parents can make complaints to multiple places, which leaves confusion and frustration on the part of parents and extra work for school leaders. I know this is something the Secretary of State is very lively and has promised to come back with ideas in the schools white paper which is coming, as we know, very soon.

Perhaps I put the 'very' In. Our amendment would ensure that complaints are dealt with with only one party at the time and it is the most appropriate one. The noble Baroness the Minister will be aware of cases where tremendous pressure is placed on the leadership of schools, including in some occasions where false, vindictive allegations are made. I remember visiting a school where a parent alleged that over half of the members of staff had behaved inappropriately towards their child.

Each complaint was made to multiple organisations, and had to be dealt with individually, which took a huge toll on school leaders and on their colleagues. And Paul Whiteman, general secretary of the National Association of Headteachers said, we are hearing more often from school leaders who have seen a significant increase in complaints, including a big rise in those that are clearly vexatious or baseless. This can harm the well-being and cause unnecessary stress and workload. He also agrees that too often, complaints are escalated unnecessarily, sometimes to multiple agencies at the same time.

I hope I am safe in saying that I do not think my noble friend or I are wedded to the particular approach that we have in our amendment but we are wedded to supporting schools and parents so complaints can be dealt with swiftly and clearly, with a minimum of stress and expense. Both human and financial, to all involved. I look forward to hearing from the noble Baroness the Minister the government's plans in this area. the government's plans in this area.
14:54
Baroness Blake of Leeds Portrait Baroness Blake of Leeds (Labour)
-
-
Can I thank noble Lords for their contributions and raising this very important area around parental complaints, appeals and relating to the introduction of a Central School complaints system. The government completely understands the concern on this matter. And as I will go on to mention, the increase in the areas around complaints is quite staggering when you see the statistics laid out. However, the amendments for a five, 487, 488 tabled by Lord Jackson, -- 485, they would allow parents and carers for children in respectively retained schools, independent schools, including academies, and non- maintained special schools, to adhere to the First-tier Tribunal.

Amendment 489 tabled by Lord Jackson would allow for regulations to amend secondary legislation on the rules and procedures of the first-tier Tribunal. I note the detailed examples that the noble Lord highlighted to us in the chamber. Following on to amendment 502, YM, tabled by Lady Spielman, this seeks to introduce a central complaints system to handle school-related complaints in England and for these complaints to be held in a central database, accessible to the Department for Education and Ofsted.

I hope we have made very clear throughout the passage of the bill that... Are repeated again, that the government's mission is to Break Down Barriers to Opportunity driving high that rising standards so all children are supported to achieve and thrive. I think this whole area does fit into this discussion of these amendments. When parents and carers believe schools are not delivering the standards expected of them, they do have, of course, the right to raise complaints with schools. This is of the utmost importance.

All schools are required to have a complaints policy in place that is promoted and is effectively implemented. We believe the additional level of appeals in the First-tier Tribunal would increase burden on a school system already under enormous pressure from the increasing number of parent complaints. The existing system already allows for the escalation of complaints where parents and carers believe complaints have not been handled compliantly or a school has not adhered to education law.

When non-compliance is identified, the Secretary of State for Education has the powers to intervene in a way that is proportionate and necessary to bring resolution to their parent carers complaint. We have accepted and acknowledge the issues and concerns that are being raised by both schools and parents and carers about the current school complaints system. Both from the pressure it places on schools, we have heard good examples of that, and the frustration it can cause for parents and carers, the increase in parent carer complaints, of course, as Lord Storey highlights, is a growing concern across the whole sector.

That is why we are working on the improving education together group, bringing together colleagues from across the sector to improve the school complaints system. Our aim is to reduce the burden on schools and leaders whilst also maintaining parents rights to raise concerns, including by exploring ways to reduce unnecessary duplication. We want to create a better and clearer system for parents and improve the relationship between schools and families. Baroness Barran quite rightly highlights the work that parent kind have done in this space.

parent kind have done in this space. I'm very pleased to inform the chamber that the Secretary of State did go to that event to look at the launch of the latest publication on this, just on Tuesday this week, ironically when we were in the chamber on Tuesday. I think that has been a very important step forward. Resetting relationships between schools and parents so that trust levels are high and any issues are resolved informally before they become complaints.

The other pressure I need to draw attention to, and why we are very concerned about putting additional burdens on, is the pressure from SEND related tribunal's. The number of appeals has risen by 40 percent and above in the last year alone. I think it is well-known that we are working with the Ministry of Justice to try and bring more capacity into that system. This will be addressed in the SEND reform review that will be coming out later in the autumn.

It is important as well, I think bonus Spielman raises a very important point -- Baroness Spielman raises an important point about AI, people are finding new applications all the time, putting a few words into Chat GPT or whatever and coming out with a whole document built on that. And I want to reassure her that the department is fully aware of this situation and is looking at ways to support schools in this space, including revision to the departments guidance to schools on departments guidance to schools on Where complaints cannot be resolved informally we must ensure that schools can focus on more robust...

I think parents do need more assurance around this. Clarifying roles responsibility so complaints to schools... That schools cannot resolve need to be dealt with in a timely manner by the right body and I think that is where the noble Lord is saying there there is that frustration building in. The Secretary of State has made clear that she wants to make sure that the system is robust, respectful, in the interests of finding resolutions quickly. There is nothing worse than allowing situations to fester.

But most importantly, in the best interests of the children, I think that is what we need to put at the foremost of our mines and why this is such an important area. -- Of our mines. We will continue working with Parentkind on the work they're doing to develop shared principles that will support mutual understanding between parents and schools around complaints. And we expect to be able to see more about how we will improve the relationships between schools and parents, including how we will improve the schools complaints system in the Schools White Paper.

I do want to give that reassurance that this is being taken exceptionally seriously and the Secretary of State is fully engaged in how we move forward. We do not believe that introducing the First- tier Tribunal as an additional layer to the complaints system is the right way to achieving our aims of reducing burdens on schools. And on an anecdotal note, I do have the great privilege of having a large family. And my children have shown me the contents of WhatsApped groups that all parents are involved in, every class has a WhatsApped group, are several more WhatsApped groups are different interest areas.

-- WhatsApp. And looking at some of the comments on some of those groups is actually very concerning indeed. And it is instant. The comments go out the night before and parents are in the playground the next morning. It is a very difficult space for teachers. Enlighten schools, schools are really moving for, have a good system in place of engaging with children, supporting them, having nurturing groups and all of those things that are so important to try and pre-empt the situations that come up, developing to the extremes we know they can be.

So, moving forward, our whole intention is to make sure that we reduce burdens on schools in a constructive way for everyone involved. And we must make sure that we protect work of the First-tier tribunals and a very important work they do. On this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

basis I would ask that noble Lords withdraw their amendments. Before the noble Baroness sits

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Before the noble Baroness sits down I wonder if she could either down I wonder if she could either say now or to write me and put the letter in the library, just to clarify, in relation to simplification of the complaints system, which argosy the Secretary system, which argosy the Secretary of State has said she would like to do and which is at the heart of the amendment in the name of my noble amendment in the name of my noble friend, Baroness Spielman and I, does that require a change in primary legislation or can it be done in secondary legislation? Because if it requires primary Because if it requires primary legislation, I'm sure that colleagues in the department will be able to craft some kind of able to craft some kind of commencement clause or I'm not quite sure what it would be but a clause that would allow that to happen that would allow that to happen without us having to wait several years for more legislation.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

years for more legislation. ... Raises a very important point.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

... Raises a very important point. And these will all be matters that are being considered as the Secretary of State makes this Secretary of State makes this important work forward. I can get a written note, we will put it in the
15:05
Lord Jackson of Peterborough Portrait Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Conservative)
-
-
written note, we will put it in the library. And will outline the way forward and we are at this point in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

time. I thank the noble Lady the Minister for her well thought Minister for her well thought through and considered response. It through and considered response. It ranged wider than I expected but just for the avoidance of doubt, of course I deprecate any unreasonable or vexatious complaints against or vexatious complaints against teachers from parents which might teachers from parents which might veer into antisocial behaviour to the type she mentioned in terms of the type she mentioned in terms of WhatsApp groups and I'm happy to put that on record.

I think this is been very thoughtful and important debate very thoughtful and important debate and I'm grateful to noble Lords that and I'm grateful to noble Lords that took part, not least Lord Storey and my noble friend Baroness Spielman, who both brought great expertise and experience to the debate. Lord Storey from his time on Liverpool Storey from his time on Liverpool City Council and my noble friend from her leadership at Ofsted. At from her leadership at Ofsted. At the heart of this debate has revolved around a single click revolved around a single click question, do we believe that laws passed in this place should be passed in this place should be enforceable in schools? evidence demonstrates system bureaucratic brick walls and institutional inertia is the true source of conflict with frustration.

We have heard concerns about costs about I ask again what is the price of the status quo? What is the cost of a Department of Health's duty of parental trust in schools evaporating? This accountability does not remain empty for long, it is filled by an entire ecosystem of unaccountable third-party advisers and activists. This is not, I suggest, failure of individual teachers, but a systemic failure. In the absence of clear enforcement of law it becomes muted and professionals are less rudderless.

And into this void step commercial subscription services, just to give one final example in this debate, the key, an organisation first established by the pump education itself before being privatised. When itself before being privatised. When it was last consulted on gender questioning children, the key actively counter schools that would be unlawful to follow that guidance. The accountability of these amendments introduces not just the schools it is for the entire advisory industry and industry funded by strict school budgets.

When the advice of these organisations is tested by tribunal found wanting, schools will quite rightly cease to pay for it. The market for bad advice will therefore for the first time face a correction. These amendments are not a radical proposal, they do not seek to create a conflict but to provide clear, fair and independent form for its resolution. They do not undermine professional judgement but they do so Lord native to the rule of law -- subordinated to the rule of law, as it should be.

They give parents a voice and ability. The choice is simple, we can endure the current inertia, condemning parents to a system that doesn't work or we could take a meaningful step to restore accountability, to uphold the will of Parliament, to ensure that when a parent has a legitimate concern, the school is breaking the law, they do have somewhere to go. I believe we must choose the latter. But for now, I beg leave to withdraw these amendments and will consider

**** Possible New Speaker ****

returning them at a later date. Is at your Lordships pleasure

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Is at your Lordships pleasure this amendment be withdrawn. The amendment is by leave withdrawn. Amendment 486 has already been debated, not moved. 487. Not moved. debated, not moved. 487. Not moved. 488, not moved. 489, not moved. 490, 488, not moved. 489, not moved. 490, not moved. 491, not moved. We now not moved. 491, not moved. We now come to the group of amendments beginning with amendment 492. After
15:10
Lord Holmes of Richmond Portrait Lord Holmes of Richmond (Conservative)
-
-
beginning with amendment 492. After clause 62, amendment 490. -- 492.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to move amendment 492 in my name and to give more than a positive nod to the other amendment positive nod to the other amendment in this group. For amendment 492 can I also thank my friends, Baroness I also thank my friends, Baroness Grey-Thompson and SATA -- Baroness Grey-Thompson and SATA -- Baroness Hayter and Lord Moynihan for cosigning this amendment and thank them for the work they do in this them for the work they do in this area.

We have a physical and a area. We have a physical and a mental well-being crisis in this country. In previous sessions of this Bill we have discussed rightly this Bill we have discussed rightly mental well-being crisis. My amendment 492 goes to the heart of amendment 492 goes to the heart of the physical well-being crisis. It is costing the taxpayer in the billions. It is breaking the NHS. billions. It is breaking the NHS. And a community, crucially, at an And a community, crucially, at an individual level, it is an absolute tragedy which can, should and must tragedy which can, should and must be avoided.

My amendment 492 simply suggests that the Government should look at their means of incorporating the Chief Medical Officer's advice on weekly and in that daily physical activity into the school program. And being might be in no doubt, I'm not talking here about competitive sport, I'm not even talking about games, I am talking about physical literacy, physical fluency. Moving, dancing, being in this great physical form of our human cells that we are born with. So, I look forward to the Minister's response, it is a very simple amendment but it could make a profound difference to so many people's lives.

I beg to move.
15:12
Lord Moynihan Portrait Lord Moynihan (Conservative)
-
-
Amendment proposed, article 62, insert the new clause is printed on the Marshalled List.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to support the amendment in the name of my noble friend Lord Holmes, which was eloquently Holmes, which was eloquently summarised to the committee. I will summarised to the committee. I will also public with my amendment but first reflect on some of the key issues behind the need to improve issues behind the need to improve physical education programs studied in the UK school curriculum. On in the UK school curriculum. On physical education to me is not really a subject, it is a cornerstone of the development of cornerstone of the development of young people.

-- Not merely a subject. Despite the considerable subject. Despite the considerable investment in PE and sport premium funding, programs of study across UK funding, programs of study across UK schools remains inconsistent, under resourced and insufficiently resourced and insufficiently ambitious. It is imperative that we take decisive action to ensure that take decisive action to ensure that every child has access to high- quality, inspiring physical quality, inspiring physical education. First the curriculum must be rigorously structured yet be rigorously structured yet flexible, ensuring aggressive development and foundational movement skills in key stage I, to more complex games, athletics and leadership opportunities in key stage form.

-- Key stage IV. This structure should be underpinned by clear learning outcomes, encompassing not only physical confidence but also personal, social and cognitive development. Second, I believe teacher training must be continuous. Too many schools rely on external coaches or undertrained staff, which undermines the sustainability and consistency. Ongoing professional development, supported by national standards of mentoring, well-equipped teachers to deliver high-quality, inclusive PE lessons that inspire pupils across the ability spectrum. Third, inclusive practices must be central. The curriculum must accommodate disabled pupils, those less confident in sport, the underrepresented groups.

Ensuring that all children can participate meaningfully. Adapted activities, peer mentoring and differentiated assessment can facilitate this inclusivity and inclusivity is essential. Finally, the curriculum should embrace innovation... Incorporating non-traditional sports, dance, outdoor recreation and cross curriculum activities to engage diverse interests, build lifelong participation habits, participation in partnerships with local sports clubs, universities and community organisations. All of which can further enrich provision. In short, by strengthening structure, training inclusivity and innovation, we can transform PE from a marginal subject into a vibrant central element of the school experience.

Preparing young people not only to be active but to thrive in life. And so with that in mind I turned to my proposal for a national strategy physical education and sport in schools, what I call a call to action. As a former Minister for chairman Vernon Association, I witnessed firsthand the transformative power of sport in shaping young lives. However, it is with a sense of urgency and concern that I address the current state of physical education and support in our schools, not just over the last year, but over a number of years.

The absence of a cohesive national strategy has led to disparities in access, poor facilities, too much time allocated to travel to and from sport whilst during the curriculum, the outcomes undermining the potential benefits the sport can potential benefits the sport can potential benefits the sport can On top of that we have had financial attacks on independent schools that have led to cuts to bursaries for state school pupils, that would damage state school pupils in the sector.

92 percent of the 82 boys and girls who went through Millfield had transformative bursaries attached to them. So many of the independent schools are having to cut back on their costs, trim their sails and cut back on those bursaries. Despite the government's commitment to physical education, the reality in many schools is far from ideal. Recent reports indicate since at London 2012 Olympics and Paralympics, the UK has seen a reduction of 7,000 PE teachers. 30 percent of children engaged in less than 13 minutes of daily physical activity, obesity is growing.

There has been a decline of 41,000 PE teaching hours compared to the 2011/2012 school year. Children now receive less playtime, 20 minutes less playtime at school than three decades ago. In my view, the statistics are not merely numbers, they represent missed opportunities for children to develop physical literacy, teamwork and resilience. The lack of a unified strategy resulted in a fragmented approach to PE where schools operate in isolation, without a shared vision isolation, without a shared vision or coordinated effort.

The National strategy for PE and sport in schools is not just desirable, it is imperative. Such a strategy would provide physical education, high quality physical education in sport. It would provide for equitable access, it would provide for sustainable provision. It would provide for professional development. It would provide for inclusive practices and collaborative networks. It, in its formulation, would allow us to look to countries like Australia and Canada that have implemented national strategies and had positive outcomes for their children.

This demonstrates that coordinated long- term approach can lead to significant improvements in sport and education. This is a call to action. That is what this amendment does. The time for action is now. I urge the government to accept this amendment, take a lead on school sport, to develop and implement a national strategy, to collaborate with educators, sports organisations and communities to create a comprehensive plan that addresses the current challenges and sets clear goals for the future. To invest in teacher training, three to six hours of training in the whole time they prepared to be a teacher.

We need ongoing professional development to equip teachers with the skills for high quality PE lessons. We need to ensure high quality funding, allocate sufficient resources to schools to support the delivery of PE and sport programs. Including the maintenance of facilities and the purchase of equipment. The maintenance of facilities is critical. For too long, sport, recreational play opportunities for young people, all people, is a discretionary item of Local Authorities, not a compulsory one. It is the first item to be cut. That is why so many throwing pools are being closed and so many playing fields not protected.

We need to make sure the plan promotes inclusivity, ensure that all children, regardless of background or ability, have equal opportunities to participate in physical education and sport. And we need to monitor and evaluate, subject to another amendment discussed at the last sitting of the committee, and I hope we return to when we come back at report stage. We need to establish mechanisms to assess the effectiveness of PE programs and make necessary adjustments to improve outcomes. It is a children's right, to refer back to an earlier discussion, to have a healthy and active lifestyle.

That strategy for PE and sport in schools is not just about enhancing physical health, it is about fostering well-rounded individuals who are confident, resilient and prepared for the challenges of the future. By investing in our children's physical education today, we are investing in a healthier, more prosperous society tomorrow. Let us not squander this opportunity. The time to act is now. I beg to move my amendment.
15:22
Baroness Sater Portrait Baroness Sater (Conservative)
-
-
I rise to speak to amendment 492, 502H, calling for a national strategy for sports and physical education in schools. I was fortunate enough to work alongside colleagues with significant experience in sport in House of Lords Select Committee on 2023. This amendment is underpinned by the recommendations from the committee. The report calls for a long-term, cross government plan to embed physical activity and well-being into our educational system. PE to be made of core subjects, teacher training be improved and access to school sport should be widened to tackle the inequalities and participation.

The committee also recommended that we gather better data through a national physical activity observatory. These are all the kinds of reforms that a national strategy, as proposed in this amendment, will deliver. At present, fewer than half of children meet the Chief Medical Officer's physical activity guidelines. According to the latest survey, only 45 percent of children meet the target during school hours and 56 percent muted outside of school. With levels varying significantly across different demographic groups.

This is one of the main reasons why we need a national strategy. The amendment comes with a list of recommendations but it is not an exclusive one. The scope needs to be broad enough to obtain the right data and evidence to be able to create effective guidance and consistent delivery for all schools so we can reach all children and better support their physical and mental development. Without the national, coherent strategy, we risk leaving physical education fragmented and under resourced. This amendment provides a clear framework to provide sport and physical activity is essential to children's education, well-being, and a lifelong healthy lifestyle, through a holistic approach, one that supports physical, mental and social development.

I turned to amendments which call for curriculum reviews to investigate how physical education programs are studied and recommended levels of physical activity can best be delivered in our schools. These reviews will provide a deep dive into the current delivery of PE school sport, giving insight into the programme of study being implemented and how they may improve the sport and physical activity offer in schools. Without the insight we run the risk of fragmented and difficult provision that fails to meet the needs of all schoolchildren.

I was delighted to serve on the Association of physical education's task force in 2019, called the heart of school life, which looked at the future of physical education in schools. It was clear then, and remains true now, that the physical activity is about more than fitness or about more than fitness or competitive sport. It led to a wide view of how PE is implemented and interpreted in schools. The heart of school life report highlighted the need to emphasise the unique role physical education plays, distinct from general sport and physical activity and forge stronger links activity and forge stronger links Court subject, making sure it is valued and resourced accordingly.

The report also highlighted how PE should develop a wide range of skills beyond competition, including leadership, teamwork, resilience and personal development. The border benefits can only be realised through a curriculum that offers a diverse and inclusive programme. A National Curriculum review would clarify what is delivered, how it is delivered and where it is delivered. It can also explore how P may better integrate with other subjects such as maths, English and outdoor environmental learning, making it more accessible and holistic as part of school life to the benefit of improved academic outcomes.

If we are truly serious about improving sport and physical education in schools, we must be considering if there might be better ways to achieve our goals. We all recognise teachers in schools are under immense pressure and the health and wellbeing of our children are not improving. We see worrying trends. It is a bit of a perfect storm. It is time to treat physical education and sport is an essential part of the curriculum, not an optional extra or afterthought. These amendments will provide a clearer vision and direction for the future of school sport and physical activity and hopefully improve the health and well-being of our children.
15:27
Baroness Evans of Bowes Park Portrait Baroness Evans of Bowes Park (Conservative)
-
-
I support the amendments in this group and in doing so declare my interest as a board member of the London Marathon foundation. The group of amendments call for a curriculum review and national strategy to embed physical activity and sport firmly within the school day. They are timely and urgently needed because the evidence is overwhelming that physical activity is not an optional extra for young people, it is crucial to their health, learning and life chances. The statistics tell a worrying story, one third of British children aged five to nine are projected to be overweight or obese by 2050.

As we have heard, according to the Chief Medical Officer, children and young people aged five to 18 should be active for at least 60 minutes a day, yet around 2 million children managed less than 30 minutes of daily activity, including walking. We are seeing a trend of young people's mental health deteriorating alongside physical health. These are not just numbers, they represent millions of young people whose physical and emotional well-being is compromised before adulthood begins. Sport and daily physical activity are among the most powerful tools we have to reverse these trends.

Regular exercise improves cardiovascular health, brings muscle and bone strength and help maintain a healthy weight but its benefits go far beyond the body. Evidence shows physically active children perform better academically, have a high level of concentration and better behaviour in class, and can develop social and emotional skills such as teamwork, resilience and respect. Sport is a protector of mental health, reducing anxiety and depression as well as fostering friendships and a sense of belonging. Despite the acknowledged important benefits of having young people engaging physical activity, as my noble friend highlighted, Britain has 7,000 fewer PE teachers now than at the time of the 2012 Olympics.

Together, these amendments would create a framework for a coherent, evidence-based approach, a curriculum that guarantees daily activity, a program that develops lifelong skills and habits and a national strategy that ensures accountability and investment. Schools cannot achieve this step change alone. Nationally, there are many sporting organisations that can and already do work collaboratively and already do work collaboratively To be more active. Among them are the London Marathon foundation and London Marathon events who are demonstrating how imaginative partnerships with local schools can be children who might otherwise miss out.

Take the daily mail, the simple idea, getting children to run, jog or we'll for 15 minutes a day has spread rapidly because it works. London Marathon foundation events have been foundation partners of the daily mile in England. They are creating playgrounds in areas of deprivation. The aim is to engage more than half a million children in daily physical activity. Park runs for four to 14-year-olds and investment has already increased weekly participation from 13,500 to over 19,000, with over a million Park runs completed.

There has been a 35 There has been a 35/30 five percent increase. Registrations often came from children who were previously inactive. There are many projects across the country that demonstrate what can be achieved when ambition, evidence and partnership come together. They also highlight how much more could be achieved if government policy could meet the scale of the challenge. That is why these amendments are so important to ensure that every child, wherever they live, whatever their background, has the opportunity to be active every day, and have the benefits of a healthy and have the benefits of a healthy
15:31
Lord Storey Portrait Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Where did it all go wrong? You

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Where did it all go wrong? You can look back to those halcyon days where, in primary schools, there were two lessons of PEO week were two lessons of PEO week timetabled. And PE was a whole range timetabled. And PE was a whole range of not -- activities from Jim to games et cetera. There would be swimming and children regularly left swimming and children regularly left school being able to swim 20 metres. There were after-school sports competitions, and in secondary competitions, and in secondary schools there was thriving sport taking place.

As we've heard, that wasn't just beneficial for the well-being of children and young people, it was also important for people, it was also important for their health in terms of obesity. It was also important in terms of teamwork, working together, teamwork, working together, understanding each other. And this understanding each other. And this is not just something that can be laid at the hands of the present government. In fact, the present government in a former iteration did a great deal of work on sport.

People think I'm a member of his fan club, but the Blair government brought in some of the most radical proposals on sport this country has proposals on sport this country has seen. And whether it's a mixture of COVID or the recession or whatever,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

it all just suddenly... I'm sorry, I just have to interject here. And just say, the narrowing of the curriculum and the narrowing of the curriculum and the teacher supply crisis was a direct result of austerity. A direct result result of austerity. A direct result of teacher pay falling by 12 percent of teacher pay falling by 12 percent in real terms. A direct result of chronic underfunding of schools. All chronic underfunding of schools. All of which was initiated during the coalition, and continued really until 2024.

So absolutely children deserve a rich and balanced curriculum, that becomes much more curriculum, that becomes much more difficult if children are not being taught by teachers qualified in their subject area, by unqualified teachers, the teacher supply crisis teachers, the teacher supply crisis started and became acute during the started and became acute during the last government. So I'm sorry, when we have debates we can't ignore the practical consequences of chronic underfunding, chronic undermining of the profession, the start of the coalition and absolute policy of attacking teachers and attacking leaders as being responsible for these school standards falling.

And then a deliberate narrowing of the curriculum to a range of academic subjects which has meant precipitous decline in arts, drama, and a shorting of the experience children get of physical education. Sorry, I just have to put all that on the record so those questions my noble friend is rightly asking and coming up with a different set of conclusions are on the record.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I just say, I don't

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I just say, I don't recognise, luckily, what the dystopian view he is giving. The dystopian view he is giving. The school where my daughter was, the school where I now teach, where they school where I now teach, where they are very full before school, during lunchtime and after school lunchtime and after school activities. I would just like to put on record in this House that my daughter's under 15 team one the local cup.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

local cup. I'm grateful for those comments, believe it or not. It could well believe it or not. It could well have been your speech, to be quite have been your speech, to be quite honest, and I might have gone on to say some of those things. If you look at some of my other contributions in this House I have, contributions in this House I have, for example, decried the government stance on Eve act which has created problems for the creative industries as well as for sport.

And for physical education. And only yesterday when Lord Gove spoke I referred to those cataclysmic changes that his time as Secretary of State brought about. I'm slightly annoyed he referred to a reasonable request for a national guarantee on tutoring as a sort of publicity stunt by the Lib Dems, that was my reaction to that. No, I accept everything you've said. I do think it has to be... Politicians not in this chamber of course, we sometimes forget what happened beforehand.

And the country was on its knees because of the recession. Well, it was. You have to see that. A government had to step forward and take some difficult decisions. But, those difficult decisions didn't have 2C the dismantling of some of the services both you and I think are really important. As the Head Teacher of a primary school for 23 years, the things you are telling me I actually recognise. Of course I do. It's not in every school. But we are talking about PE.

Let me move on to one example of PE I know a great deal about, that is swimming. I declare an interest as a patron of the Royal Society of life-saving. Swimming is important to us as a nation, we are an island. Yet you look at the figures, and I had actually got them to hand, the sad figure I do know is somewhere in the region of 250 people drown every year. 40 or so of those are children between the ages of primary age and 17.

And those figures are rising. And why is that happening do you think? Why are drownings happening? Because fewer and fewer schools have not got the resources to swim. How many schools have a swimming pool they could go to? I remember in those halcyon days in my borough, primary schools would have in each area a small learner pool you could walk to. We could take even top infants, every child had a term and 1/2 of swimming. 98 percent of children left school being able to do the 20 metres.

That does not happen now, for the very reasons we have just heard. And if we are serious about the importance of sport, and I pay tribute to Lord Moynihan, I thought his speech was absolutely spot on. Everything he said I could not agree with... Sorry, I'm still recovering from the intervention. I agree with everything that he said. And I would support all those four amendments, and I thank Lourdes for introducing and I thank Lourdes for introducing them.

-- Lourdes. Children get so much from sport and physical education, it's not only about their well-being, it also helps them in their other studies. I used to find when children have done PE, and one of the local Head Teachers in my area is to start off the day not doing numerous literacy, they would start of the school day by doing a creative activity. Either sport or drama or dance, or something like that. Because it got people energised and actually helped with their learning.

Sport is not just important for the mind and body, it's also important for the well- being and development of a child as a whole. Thank you those people who put those amendments down. I think I can speak for my party when we say we very much support them.
15:40
Lord Addington Portrait Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
I would like to say a few words here, my noble friend has covered what happens in school but when we are talking about this it is one area of activity if it is done at all properly, school is merely a part of a great continuum. When it goes out into your community. Whether we like it or not, whether school sports partnerships were going to save the breakdown in the traditional links between school and sport, we don't know because they went there long enough.

It was one of the weirdest things possible, and many of us in both parts of the coalition for this, you kept them going until the Olympics and then you cancel them afterwards when you might have got some benefit from it. A small nod from Lord Moynihan there, a bigger one now. That's exactly what we thought at the time. We also knew from that, and looking at studies, that a big sporting event is great for tourism, it's great for volunteering generally.

Doesn't make any difference to grassroots sport unless you back it up with something. It's an inspiration. Those people who do it, schools have to work with grassroots. I believe in the amendments here we have a start of that structure. The start of what we are going forward to. It's not just the bill in this department, if we are going to lose lots of playing fields then the planning Bill, it doesn't matter what you do because you won't be playing anywhere else, probably not schools.

We have to have something that goes forward. These amendments start to look

**** Possible New Speaker ****

slightly broader. We mentioned playing fields. --

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We mentioned playing fields. -- E. One of the most important roles E. One of the most important roles sport England players they are the statutory consultee for playing fields in this country. And it was fields in this country. And it was exceptionally worrying when just a few months ago the government announced they were putting out to announced they were putting out to consultation whether sport England should continue their role. I would should continue their role. I would ask my noble friend whether he sees anybody else who would perform that anybody else who would perform that role.

And won't it be even more damaging to playing fields in this country, which are so important to country, which are so important to the public at large, wouldn't it be even more damaging if there was nobody amongst all the statutory consultee is whose job it was to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

ensure their survival? The answer is yes, yes and yes. And I hope the Minister will be And I hope the Minister will be making sure her colleagues and other departments take this on board. I departments take this on board. I moved an amendment on the planning Bill which suggested we actually Bill which suggested we actually should make sure this duty is still there. And I would hope the two parts of government, I know I am asking the Minister to part Red Sea and take the salt out at the same time, actually talk to each other on this.

Because if you are going to have an effective strategy here, where schools provide the initial smorgasbord of finding the right form of physical activities for individuals, physique, culture everything else comes into it. Let's not forget temperament. If you have all these going in and you want people to remain active for physical activity leads to better exam results, something we seem to forget. If we are going to do that I would hope that the government talks across to support these amendments.

What I would like to hear from the Minister is that we are going to have a coherent look at this, and they will lead other departments to do something solid. Because unless you do that, unless you take on and lead departments, I think it seems to get buried in health, if you are going to take that chance to achieve some of these aims, and these amendments we have in front of us or something like them are essential to making sure we have a duty that says

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this is what you should be doing. Please let me thank noble Lords for raising the critically important issue of sport and physical education in schools. One which I education in schools. One which I personally feel particularly strongly about. If finite say that strongly about. If finite say that if schools were to perform physical exercise in the morning before classes it would be classes it would be transformational. I would also say
15:45
Earl of Effingham Portrait The Earl of Effingham (Conservative)
-
-
transformational. I would also say school sport has no greater champion in your Lordship's House than Lord Moynihan. An Olympic silver medallist and former chairman of the British Olympic Association. The noble Lord has been leading the charge for greater provision of physical education in sport across our schools for many years. It is a truly frightening statistic that NHS England research published in September of last year found 15 percent of children in England aged between two and 15 are obese.

Whilst that figure is a slight decrease from the 16 percent in 2019, the fact that childhood obesity has remained stubbornly high should be a huge concern for everyone. Parents, teachers, the NHS, the Department for Work and Pensions. This issue affects us all in some way or other. And of course, this is not a Sport England has highlighted the negative impact the pandemic had on children's activity levels and their attitudes towards sports. Children who were in year four and below when the pandemic struck at the most disadvantaged.

In this age group remains less likely to have positive attitudes towards activity, and they retain a lower sense of opportunity. In fact, as many noble Lords have already mentioned, only 44% of children are doing an average of at least 60 minutes of physical exercise per day. The minimum level as recommended by the Chief Medical Officer. There is totally compelling evidence of the cost to society of such a lack of activity in physical education. Sport England's recent findings demonstrate a clear link between physical activity and improved dental health.

Active children report higher happiness, better emotional resilience, and a stronger tendency to keep going when times get tough. And unsurprisingly, inactive children report directly the opposite. My Lords, the alarm bells should be ringing very loudly in your Lordships ears. Sport England survey also found that happiness scores are down those age groups. Children in school years 3- 6, those most impacted by the Covid lockdowns, have seen the largest falls in those reporting positive attitudes, down nearly 5% compared to children the same age during the 2018 academic year.

Children in years seven and eight have seen a long-term drop down the 4%. And it does not stop there. We are also seeing a decline in children's will to persevere. The largest drop since the 2018 academic year in individual development. Those who keep calm and carry on when they find something challenging are seen for those in school years five to eight down 7% respectively compared to when older children were that age 6 years ago. We are seeing the scars of lost activity.

Not just physically but mentally too. And that is precisely why his Majesty's loyal opposition strongly supports the amendment in this group. Amendment 492 in the name of Lord Holmes calls for a review to incorporate the recommended amount of physical education into the school curriculum. Given that we know this is not currently being implemented fully, and children are not exercising enough, the government surely must take action to get our children active. Why would they not do such a thing? Amendment 502 in the name of Lord Morgan goes even further and proposes a full national strategy for physical education and sport in schools.

Again, given the detrimental physical and mental impact on children and lack of sporting activity, this is urgently needed. I might suggest this is a no-brainer. We know how sport can improve educational attainment and outcomes for our children. This is a fact. Sport and physical activity can make children both happier and healthier. In an age where young people are bombarded by social media, where they spend more time online and active than ever before, and where their physical and mental health is deteriorating, taking real action to boost physical education, sport, and activity in schools is not an option, it is a necessity.

If I might briefly finish by proposing that one of the actions to guarantee greater participation by children in sport and physical activity would be the banning of smartphones in schools. The noble Baroness Lady Blake said just 30 minutes ago from that very Dispatch Box opposite me, that the content of WhatsApp groups is greatly concerning. The Children's Commissioner has said that many children are accessing harmful content through social media and chat rooms. A groundbreaking large-scale randomised controlled study, the gold standard in social science from University of Pennsylvania.

It offers clear evidence that banning smartphones improves classroom result and has a knock-on effect of improving curriculum activities. The government can no longer say they are waiting for the evidence. The evidence is there my Lords, and the government should be acting right now for the benefit of all schoolchildren on this and on physical activity.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, can I just start off by saying that I actually agree with saying that I actually agree with the vast majority of the points made the vast majority of the points made by noble Lords opposite. But I do just have to say, we are not in this just have to say, we are not in this House disinterested observers of the House disinterested observers of the activities of governments. Several of the noble Lords opposite quite rightly identified the decline in rightly identified the decline in school sports, the reduction in teachers, the narrowing of the teachers, the narrowing of the curriculum, were supporters of or part of the government that was part of the government that was responsible for it.

So I just think that I need to put that on the record as we start this. Having said record as we start this. Having said that, there is good news. This government is reviewing the government is reviewing the curriculum. It is establishing a new national approach to PE and school sports. It does value PE and sport is a great opportunity to improve not only the health but...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

If we are doing it for PE and school, is there going to be a school, is there going to be a specific link to activity outside school? A lot of the sports education is done by governing bodies of sport and the grassroots. bodies of sport and the grassroots. I would hope she will give some reassurance that will be there.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

reassurance that will be there. I know I added a little bit to the beginning of my speech but I am the beginning of my speech but I am actually only three lines through. I will come to precisely that point. The amendment proposed I have to say, do align closely with the important practical work already important practical work already underway by this government. To expand access to high quality PE and school sport for every child. And we remain committed to ensuring that remain committed to ensuring that all young people regardless of background the opportunity to thrive background the opportunity to thrive through physical education, school sports, and physical activity.

And I also agree with the points I think also agree with the points I think ably made by the noble Lord Lord Holmes and Lord Morgan about the Holmes and Lord Morgan about the broader benefits of sport, and physical activity and physical education. The impact on academic achievement, the impact on mental health. The impact on healthy weight and sleep. All of those things are important elements of the broader
15:54
Baroness Smith of Malvern Portrait Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
-
-
benefits that come from active children, supported in a wide range children, supported in a wide range of ways to move. Something I have thought about carefully as I thought about carefully as I finished the Worcester 10 km on finished the Worcester 10 km on Sunday. Thank you, if you had seen how fast I did it you might not have been so impressed. Or slowly. Of been so impressed. Or slowly. Of course it is not only organised sport that is important. As several sport that is important.

As several noble Lords have said, other ways of moving bodies including dancing are moving bodies including dancing are also beneficial although I would say, on that as well, those people who thought my performance in Strictly would not necessarily recognise any benefit that I gained from that, or in fact anybody from that, or in fact anybody watching it again. But the point is physical activity, the opportunities physical activity, the opportunities to move in a whole host and variety to move in a whole host and variety of ways.

The requirements to make that as inclusive as possible is really important stop at the heart of what the government is trying to of what the government is trying to do. In June, the Prime Minister announced a new national approach to PE and school sports. This new approach will establish a school sport partnership network designed to build stronger networks between schools, local clubs, and national governing bodies, to the point made by Lord Addington, its aim is to identify and remove barriers to participation in PE and school sport, particularly for less active children, including girls and pupils with special educational needs and disabilities.

I think the point made by several noble Lords, in particular Lord Moylan and and the need for this to be inclusive, is very important. That is why we have recently announced a grant of up to £300,000 to a consortium led by the Youth Sport Trust to deliver Inclusion 2028, a program which skills teachers to deliver high quality inclusive PE school sport and physical activity to pupils with special educational needs and disabilities. This will be an important theme of the national approach as well.

Since this announcement was made, the announcement on the school sports partnership network, the Department for Education, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, and the Department of Health and Social Care, and here I strongly agree with the noble Lord Lord Addington, this is a responsibility, given the broader consequences of it that needs to be across government. Have been working with the sector to codesign the partnerships, meeting with a range of organisations including educational organisations, and governing bodies of sport.

To discuss the key principles they would like to see the new model. Furthermore the Department of Education are conducting market engagement events from 24th of September to explore the procurement of a national delivery partner to design, implement, and manage this new network from summer 2026. Procuring a national delivery partner reflects a significant investment in this approach. The market testing will help shape the scope and scale of delivery ensuring that any funding allocated is aligned with the ambition and impact we expect from a national partner.

The intention is for the national partner leading the PE in schools sport partnership network to distribute a significant budget each year to pay for targeted provision in local areas. The total funding for this will be confirmed as part of that department's business plan. In addition, we are also working with experts to deliver a new enrichment framework by the end of the year. Highlighted best practice in considering how standardised benchmarks and tools can support schools will stop this will provide advice for schools on how to plan a high-quality strategic enrichment offer and how to make use of specific programs to increase access to sport and arts.

I also...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I ask their, the one that I'm sure she will recognise, there are many in this committee who have been campaigning exceptionally hard for improved opportunities for young people in sport and recreation, irrespective of who has been in government. One of the great aspects of this House has been cross-party of this House has been cross-party support frequently on making sure that we try and improve the that we try and improve the provision of sport and recreation.

I don't think it is a party political don't think it is a party political point. Soon after the turn of the century, pottery the most important influence on Tony Blair's decision influence on Tony Blair's decision to move forward with the Olympic to move forward with the Olympic games was a debate in this chamber on completely cross-party support. So one needs to be a bit cautious about saying why didn't we speak out about saying why didn't we speak out before, many of us have been speaking out for decades.

I acknowledge and am grateful to the acknowledge and am grateful to the Minister for racing that the Prime Minister has indeed come forward Minister has indeed come forward with a whole range of initiatives about access to high quality PE and sport for children, and equal sport for children, and equal access, and two hours of sport a week. On the national network to build strong partnerships with clubs. All we are doing in this amendment is putting into the amendment what the Prime Minister himself said, to make sure exactly done.

It has not been done by successive prime ministers, and I must admit of both political persuasions, but not least by Gordon Brown. It was never done. It was fine words were never put into practice. Would the Minister be the first to support coming back and third reading with everything that the Prime Minister has put down when he met the Lionesses as a clear mandate so we can enshrine it in legislation and make sure it happens

**** Possible New Speaker ****

What I was doing in previous paragraphs was outlining not only what the Prime Minister identified but the action the government is already taking to deliver on the already taking to deliver on the objective set down by the Prime Minister. So no, I don't think it's Minister. So no, I don't think it's necessary to enshrine it in this bill. Because I was identifying how it is in fact already happening. I'm not going to rise to his point, not not going to rise to his point, not even going to say I'm not going to rise to it otherwise I'll rise to it.

I'm just coming to the point the it. I'm just coming to the point the noble Lord made about staffing. It noble Lord made about staffing. It is encouraging this year that PE is encouraging this year that PE initial teacher training places are all taken up, obviously that's important to make sure there's a good pipeline of teachers in this good pipeline of teachers in this area. There is more to do on quality, especially in primary schools. One of the things that PE in sports partnership will bring together is the support available to together is the support available to schools, and therefore to teachers.

schools, and therefore to teachers. By making sure PE has a central place in the curriculum as well, which I'm coming onto, in the light of our curriculum and assessment review we can cement its place in schools priorities. That of course will mean a greater focus of both leaders in schools and staff. So what I was saying was that the development of the PE and sport in schools partnership relates to amendment 502H in the name of Lord Moynihan. The government is already delivering the coordinated action the noble Lord rightly calls for, both through the PE and sport in schools partnerships and the enrichment framework.

This has established a strategic framework, guided by evidence and working in collaboration with national governing bodies of sport and other organisations to raise the quality and standard of PE and sport in schools across the country. Turning to amendments for 92, table by Lord Holmes, and 502 Jade tabled by Lord Moynihan, which call for a curriculum review to look at how PE, sport and physical activity provision in schools can deliver relevant outcomes for pupils. The partnerships I've already alluded to will seek to support schools providing opportunities in and out of the curriculum for children to work towards meeting the Chief Medical Officer's recommendation of being active for an average of 60 minutes per day.

But of course, we already have underway a curriculum review of the type called for by noble Lords. And by the noble Lady Baroness Sater. In 2024 this government launched an independent curriculum assessment review, which is looking at all national curriculum subjects including physical education. It seeks to deliver a curriculum which and broad and inclusive. It's considering specific issues including physical education, subject and sport stakeholders have had the chance to feed into the review on PE and have highlighted many of the issues noble Lords have highlighted in this debate.

The interim report was published in March 2025, and highlighted the reduction in PE time especially at key stage IV. The final report will be published in the autumn with the government's response. I'm sure noble Lords will want to allow that independent curriculum review to present its recommendations. I hope that noble Lords are reassured that we have considered all of the issues raised in the debate today. And the work of the ongoing independent curriculum and assessment review, the PE and sport in schools partnerships and the enrichment framework are already starting work to tackle the issues that have been raised.

And in light of this, I hope noble Lords will feel able to withdraw their amendments.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Before the noble Lady sits down could I just ask, she made rightly reference to the curriculum review reference to the curriculum review that Becky Francis is undertaking to be published at some stage. Could I ask, what is the approach from her department in terms of ensuring all department in terms of ensuring all of the excellent work that Becky Francis will come forward is reflected in this bill, and there reflected in this bill, and there aren't any inconsistencies that could be covered in this legislation as a result of the timing difference between this legislation is passage

**** Possible New Speaker ****

between this legislation is passage and the publication of the review. Well, I was referencing first of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, I was referencing first of all the amendments calling for a curriculum review, pointing out that there was a curriculum review. What there was a curriculum review. What I would also say is, many of the I would also say is, many of the points raised in noble Lords amendments, particularly the amendment of Lord Moynihan, about amendment of Lord Moynihan, about the approach of the curriculum, the combination of the ability for example to, at a primary level, make sure what we are doing is developing the physical skills of children.

That we are promoting physical That we are promoting physical activity. And then in secondary, obviously continuing that important work, but also delivering the particular focus on sports, on competition, on particular types of sports. That is exactly the type of approach, I Becky Francis review is independent but both the interim report and the evidence provided and the consideration that's going on, that's the type of approach that is being taken in the curriculum and assessment review. assessment review.
16:06
Lord Holmes of Richmond Portrait Lord Holmes of Richmond (Conservative)
-
-
I thank all noble Lords who have taken part in this excellent debate. I'm not normally tempted to dive in to the subject of swimming, but the noble Lord story has tempted me. It is always worth reminding ourselves, particularly as he put it in an island nation, that swimming is the only sport that can save your life. And that really underscores, if anything, the critical significance of physical activity, physical literacy, fluency and education in the specific example of learning and being a competent swimmer.

My Lords, the government, as any government wants growth. And the government, as any government, faces a very clear choice when it comes to these amendments. One of the key elements of growth is investment. There could barely be a better area to invest in than physical activity, physical well-being. And the choice for any government is to invest and reap all of those social and psychological benefits at a community and country level, or to pay for all of the consequences through all of the NHS, prison service and so many other areas of government.

I think these issues will certainly be coming back at report, but for the moment I beg

**** Possible New Speaker ****

leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment is by leave withdrawn. Amendment 493, Lord Holmes of Richmond.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Me again. I rise to move

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Me again. I rise to move amendment 493, in my name, and to speak to amendment 494, and also to speak to amendment 494, and also to give appreciation to Baroness Kidron who assigned my amendment. And also who assigned my amendment. And also to give more than positive support to her amendment in this group. Educational technology, henceforth Educational technology, henceforth called Ed Tech, offers such extraordinary opportunities for extraordinary opportunities for learners right through the school and education experience.

and education experience. Effectively, personalised education Effectively, personalised education for every young person to have an effective classroom assistant effective classroom assistant alongside them in technology. It's an extraordinary upside, transformational but only if we get it right in terms of the framework, the construction and the underpinning principles that guide it. I believe that if we human lead with these technologies we give ourselves the best opportunity to succeed, and to enable, to empower all children and young people to succeed in their education journey.

If we have an approach which is support is based, outcomes focused, support is based, outcomes focused, and inputs understood, we enable and we empower, and we have a clear understanding of what we require from these tech solutions. To the amendment specifically, all Ed Tech must be inclusive by design. Accessible, transparent in terms of what is in the make up of that particular technology. Labelled if AI is in the mix. And absolutely crystal-clear as to how the data is used, where it is stored, and that none of that data, and when we say that data we mean those young people, those children's data, gets sold on to any third parties.

The opportunities are extraordinary. It's at least a touch unfortunate that so much of technology in school is being described and seen through the lens of smartphones in school. It's understandable in terms of some of the catastrophic downsides, catastrophic outcomes we have seen in that consequence. But there's nothing inevitable about that. Ed Tech positively deployed, human lead with human principles and values at the heart, with the right oversight and right approach to data, could enable such a powerful learning experience.

Primarily for the young people and children, but also the teachers and classroom assistants, for the whole school community. To amendment 494, to pull the power we have through procurement we can achieve so much by understanding how we look to the values and the underpinning principles according to how we procure. It echoes many of the underpinnings of amendment 493, to understand that if we can get that procurement standard in place then many of the potential problems and difficulties are dealt with before they even come into being because of that standard being so well set before any consideration is even given to making a purchase of any Ed Tech.

I look forward to other contributions from noble Lords and the Minister's response. I beg to move.
16:13
Baroness Kidron Portrait Baroness Kidron (Crossbench)
-
-
Amendment proposed afterglow 62 insert education technologies as set out on the marshalled list.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to move amendments in my name, I wish to register my school name, I wish to register my school for amendment 493 and 494 in the for amendment 493 and 494 in the name of Lord Holmes, and to more broadly associate myself with everything he just said. Amendment everything he just said. Amendment 502Y1 Ulster code of practice for education data. I tabled a similar education data. I tabled a similar amendment to the data use and access amendment to the data use and access bill earlier this year, at that time I was given an assurance from the Minister Lord Vallance who said "A Minister Lord Vallance who said "A firm commitment that the government will use powers under the data will use powers under the data protection act 2018 for the ICO to publish a new code of practice publish a new code of practice addressing Ed Tech issues.

A letter I received in anticipation of today's debate from the Department today's debate from the Department suggested that government is reviewing and considering, so I reviewing and considering, so I would like to ask the noble Lady the Minister whether we are reviewing Minister whether we are reviewing and considering the firm commitment that was made nine months ago. We that was made nine months ago. We have been discussing data protection in schools since 2017. And we have had multiple promises from both Department and regulator that have yet to bear fruit.

Yet the government is pressing ahead to introduce new data hungry technology in our schools. The uses of pupils data is well evidenced and egregious, some of which has ended up in adult sites, gambling sites, and all of which are an abuse of children's privacy. Pupils are first and foremost children. They are not critical sources of data for commercial enterprise. It is beyond time to act, so I ask the noble Lady the Minister to accept the amendment so that this bill is the one that finally sets out the scope and timescale for a data regime that delivers children the protection they deserve when they are at school.

Turning to amendment 502, I wish to be very clear that I also welcome the potential of technology to contribute to learning and well- being at schools. But while the Secretary of State Bridget Phillipson has heralded a new technological area to modernise our education system, there is as yet no corresponding binding commitment to ensure the technology being The Education Endowment Foundation has said gains are often small and has warned there may be a gap whitener for socially disadvantaged students.

A 2023 DfE survey found that fewer than half of teachers thought technology improved pupil attainment. And Unesco referred to its use as a tragedy, and the results with the huge global investment is far from clear. I am delighted that the government has launched a series of research initiatives. But when the department is still developing the criteria for edtech, schools are being encouraged, sometimes pressured, to introduce technology of unknown quality. We have no insight into the learning outcomes beyond the marketing claims of a sector that is now worth $160 billion a year and growing at pace.

The children centre of the LSE found little evidence that personalised learning edtech improved attainment. This week it has published a new report which reveals appalling data practices, and on one product, marketed as an educational tool, being used in our schools, they found harmful material and design features that foster unhelpful emotional dependency. If edtech is to be central to a child's education, it must deliver learning outcomes, not to be an extension of the extractive business models that has caused so much harm to children in other domains.

Amendment 502 requires the Secretary of State through consultation with major stakeholders to prepare a statutory Code of Practice on the efficacy of all forms of edtech. For enhancing the attainment and well-being of children. Alongside a certification scheme to support procurement decisions. I have absolutely no doubt the draft can be improved, but I do ask how the Department can continue to justify, in the increasing presence of products in our schools that detract rather than enhance children's learning outcomes, whilst stealing their data.

Finally, amendment 502YH would ensure filtering monitoring systems met minimum standards. This is not the first time I have raised this issue so I wish to be bold. School is not safe because filtering and monitoring systems are not doing what they promised. In 2018, Frankie Thomas took her own life by copying what she had seen on a school device that day. A device on which the filtering system was not activated. Judy and Andy, Frankie's parents, fought tirelessly to address this issue with ministers for as long as they could.

My Lords, there is something unspeakably humbling about watching a bereaved parent trying to save the lives of other parents children. There is something deeply upsetting about a rollcall of ministers who promise never again but fail to act. On 7 June On 7 June 2023, I raised it with the then Minister Michelle Donelan. On 17 July On 17 July 2023 I raised it with Claire Coutinho. In November 2023 I raised it with Minister David Johnson. On 10th February this year I raised it with Stephen Morgan.

And over the same period I raised the issue with a similar rollcall of officials and before recess, I raised it with the noble Lady, the Minister who is in place. My Lords, we have multiple pieces of guidance on filtering and monitoring including keeping children safe in education guidance, but it is not working. I'm afraid I don't have time to recall the litany of cases in which inappropriate material has been found in schools. But let me say that the DfE is narrowing the digital divide consultation found that 41% of children's reporting they did not fully meet filtering and monitoring standards.

And I worry that the 59% who believe their schools met the standards are absolutely mistaken. Because 6/24 filtering and monitoring systems hosted on the safer internet Centre's website ourselves and to find, and allow a school administrator to disable barriers to illegal content. Which the guidance does not allow. And only three out of And only 3/24 filtering and monitoring systems on the market are believed capable of meeting the standards for GenAI. Leaving the vast bulk of schools unprotected.

Filtering and monitoring is fundamental to school safeguarding. But we have outsourced the burden onto school leaders for something that they simply cannot control. And for which children pay the price. It should not be possible for a commercial provider to sell a product to a school that does not meet the guidance. Amendment 402YH puts both standards and certification of filtering monitoring systems on a footing to ensure that any product that does not meet the standards cannot be used in our schools.

I have had offers from industry to help with the detail, and indications from government of interest in a certification scheme. Both of which are hugely welcome. But my Lords, I was in the room on more than one occasion when a minister promised Judy and Andy Thomas that they would act. And nothing short of a clear commitment on the face of the bill can fulfil those promises. I'm aware I have joined your deliberations rather late in the day. But each of these amendments tackle a fundamental gap of privacy, efficacy, and safety in school.

So absent a positive response from government, I intend to bring them back at report.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I was happy to add my name to the noble Baroness on the majority of these amendments. And she has
16:23
Lord Russell of Liverpool Portrait Lord Russell of Liverpool (Crossbench)
-
-
outlined the compelling need to do something in these interrelated areas sooner rather than later. I thought I would not boil chips but trying to illustrate one or two examples of what is actually going on in real time. Starting with a tool that most of us will be at least faintly familiar with, which is called Copilot. It is integrated into the Microsoft package that we use in Parliament. At the point that research was begun by a group of organisations including the Five Rights Foundation, at the time the research started Microsoft stated publicly that Copilot was intended for uses aged 18 and above.

However, in May in May 2025 without warning, the company announced Copilot had become available to users aged 13 and above. This shift raises important questions none of which were answered at the time by Microsoft. The user agent change proceeded without any published child rights in that assessment, taking about an early group we discussed, or documentation of any child participation in the decision. Using it in this way without any child focused safeguards is unlikely to be in the best interests of the child, and at the moment this seems to be no satisfactory way to call Microsoft to account.

The second example, there is a popular video channel with some of your Lordships may be aware of called Vimeo. In a particular case where a child was using it, some of its video capability whose homework, looking in detail at what Vimeo had done with his homework demonstrated that 92 commercial companies gained access to this child's data. Not very satisfactory. The third example is the problem that data protection officers, each school nominates one, and as you might imagine, they are struggling to try and understand and keep up with this visit of new technology, new tools.

More and more sophisticated ways of in theory giving children an education. Underwritten by hideously long and complex terms and conditionals which I suspect even an Artificial Intelligence tool would have a problem making any sense. An example would be one of our best-known technology companies, Google. It has a very successful internet business called Google Classroom. Google packages different Google products together in the same package. So within Google Classroom, you have Google Maps. So let us assume you are doing a geography project, using Google Classroom, and as part of that geography were decide to go into Google Maps, users capability.

The minute the child clicks on Google Maps, he or she loses that data protection provided by Google Classroom which allows Google Maps to harness all of the data. That is a real life current example of what is happening in plain sight. Data protection officers are not going to be aware of that, headmasters are not going to be aware of that, the students are not going to wear it. Parents are not going to be aware of it. So it seems compelling that people who should be most aware of it are the government.

The Information Commmissioner. Other bodies which other to protect, they are there to protect children with the competing technologies which quite rightly to some extent the government is encouraging schools to take advantage of. But beware of what you encourage, that understanding exactly what it is you

**** Possible New Speaker ****

are recommending. When it comes to technology I have a slightly different
16:28
Lord Addington Portrait Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
have a slightly different relationship to it, the noble Lord homes may go beyond me on this. The fact we needed to operate in the modern world. I've said before several times that I cannot use a one-page document in a readable form in any sort of format that I use voice operation. So the relationship with the technology changes. If you want to make people independent, when you are going through, in my case, dyslexia, you must make sure this information is available and they can function with it.

Having said that, the second part of this is Baroness Kidron saying that there should be safeguards with it and goes hand in glove. So you have something that allows people to function in a modern world where you are independent and interacting with the computer and you have to put in the correct information. So if Allen's needs to be achieved. As there is a move to use systems which are built into computers, as opposed to bolt on bits for educational support, and indeed in certain cases, the ministers aware of it, let's use the free bit of tech as opposed to purchasing it.

The free bit of tech is there to advertise others it would not be there. There must be a commercial advantage for someone providing a free bit of tech. So the balancing structure that Baroness Kidron puts forward is essential. To allow those like myself who need this to be able to carry on using it, and certainly we are talking about schoolchildren here but there is no shortage of people who will need it in the future and we are identifying more and more all the time.

I would hope that we can strike a balance here and make sure we get further forward into it. The same is true, I'm sure we will hear about smartphones doing the devils work. It is the information on the smartphone that we are talking about. If you can ban social media sites and block them, they Milli become a platform with other technology. I would hope that, other technology. I would hope that, as the Minister gets an answer, that we would get a more balanced approach to this here.

Because it is not all bad and not all good. It is used correctly and using safeguards is something we have not really got our heads around. I'm sure most of the commercial companies did not come in with this is their first priority. They just came in as commercial companies. And the fact that they said, we are platforms you don't have to worry about this. I would hope that there is a balanced approach and a sensible way that we can get the best out of technology.

can get the best out of technology. Indeed, she is acknowledged it is helpful, I think she knows about this, the first Minister in education, I did not have to explain what voice recognition was I given that accolade. But when talking about exams later on, recognising certain groups, and try totally with the amendment but one group of Taff technology to take exams even if you expect other people to take them with a pen. I hope you will get a coherent answer about this, at least look at the direction of travel because, if we throw the baby out with the bathwater, we will suddenly take large groups of our society will take a step back in terms of interacting with the education
16:32
Baroness Spielman Portrait Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
-
-
I've listened and a number of noble Lords have spoken wisely about the risks and concerns and things to look out for in regards to the risks of technology. I want to talk about the risks to learning itself. I've forgotten the name of somebody who recently wrote an excellent piece that illustrated this very vividly. We all understand that when we send our children to school, when we teach them, the point is not simply for them to have a thing they have done, it is the process that they go through that really embeds and enables them to use that knowledge and skills in future.

We've all seen it in the kind of problems that have arisen with coursework. If coursework essays or a homework assignment is produced for a child or a university student by AI then that child has not done the thinking, they haven't learned what it was that the assignment was set for. The education won't achieve its purpose. And there is a real risk that at the moment a lot of education in a lot of places is being quite significantly undermined because young people don't recognise that they are harming themselves by taking the shortcuts.

And perhaps we have all been a little bit slow to recognise this risk. There is a helpful distinction to be made, I think. Recently I read a piece that distinguish between cognitive offloading and cognitive bypasses. The use of assistive technologies such as Lord Addington has referred to on occasion, that might be described as cognitive offloading where the point is to help the child with the additional challenges they are experiencing without losing the point of the lesson.

Without losing what it is they are meant to be learning. But if we get to the point that the technology simply becomes a way of bypassing the learning then we are actually destroying education. And I think the enthusiasm for technology that has understandably invigorated us all, there are clearly tremendous opportunities. And the incredible energy and power of the tech firms, which of course concentrate immense efforts on Ministers to bring their products and services into schools, means that there is a massive job for government to do to find that balance and really understand the risks.

Not just the risks around data and children's wellbeing, but also the risks to education.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to speak in support of amendments for 93, 494, 502k, 502Y. Introducing technologies such as AI Introducing technologies such as AI both in schools and universities. I declare my interest as chair of the Horizons project funded by XT X Horizons project funded by XT X markets which this year reviewed the maths curriculum in England between maths curriculum in England between the ages of five to 18 and briefly investigated the use of EdTech to investigated the use of EdTech to support subjects.

I speak as a supporter of the deployment of educational technology in the educational technology in the classroom, as I believe it can and should have a positive impact on the education of children. And not just education of children. And not just in maths. This must be done within a framework that protects children framework that protects children from its misuse. We must have appropriate regulation. Regulations listed in section 2, Amendment 493,
16:36
Lord Tarassenko Portrait Lord Tarassenko (Crossbench)
-
-
listed in section 2, Amendment 493, will support the adoption of EdTech in our schools rather than hinder it. In this context, what has happened based on large language models is a salutary example of early release of AI products without proper safeguards. Especially with respect to their use by children. Tragically, this week the parents of the American teenager recently took his own life in the US after repeatedly sharing his intentions with ChatGPT, his parents told a Senate subcommittee investigating chatbot dangers, "What began as a homework helper gradually turned itself into a confidant", and then a suicide coach.

Ironically we are now told that OpenAI is building a ChatGPT for teenagers, and plans to use age prediction technology to help bar children under 18 from the standard version. This is what Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, wrote in a log this week just before the Senate hearings and then coming onto this country. This is what Sam Altman has written. "AI chatbot's are a new and powerful technology, and we at OpenAI believe miners need significant protection". The risks associated with the EdTech may not be on the same scale, but they are nevertheless real.

In many cases EdTech products used in schools rely extensively on the collection of children's data, allowing it to be used for commercial and profiling purposes. Recent report from the rights foundation at LSE highlighted that some popular classroom AI apps attract users with cookies from adult websites, and may provide inaccurate and unhelpful information. Most worryingly, a popular app used for educational purposes in the UK generates emulated empathy through the use of sentiment analysis, and so increases the likelihood of children forming emotional attachment with the app.

I therefore support amendments for 93, 494, 502k, which together would ensure EdTech products provide children with the highest standard of protection afforded by the ICO age-appropriate design code. In addition to the safeguards introduced by these amendments, there is a need for research to establish whether educational technologies do deliver better educational outcomes for children. Most EdTech products lack independent evidence that they lead to improved outcomes. Indeed, some studies have shown that EdTech products can promote repetitive or distracting experiences with minimal, if any, learning values.

On the other hand, there is a growing body of evidence in the provinces side -- positive side that EdTech side -- positive side that EdTech can support the acquisition grammar learning and reading writing skills for students for whom English is a second language. Particularly when these tools are used complement the teachers instruction. To establish a causal relationship between the use of an EdTech rule and a specific learning outcome we need to design randomised controlled trials, the gold standard for demonstrating the efficacy of interventions in the social or medical sciences.

Longitudinal data will be needed to track student usage, time on task and completion rates. Crucially, the trial must have enough participants to detect a meaningful effect, if one exists. And this is unlikely to be possible using the data from a single school, so data from several schools will need to be anonymized and then aggregated to obtain a statistically meaningful result. I am satisfied that amendments 502k and 502Y a would allow this approach to be followed.

Clause 4C of 502k would enable the code of practice and the standards to certify evidence-based EdTech products, and support the testing of novel products. This would provide UK- based companies with the opportunity to innovate in EdTech within an appropriate regulatory environment. As English is the lingua franca of the digital world, there is an opportunity for the UK to become a leader in EdTech certification for the benefit of children not only in the UK but in many other countries.

These amendments should not be seen by the Department for Education as an attempt to over regulate the EdTech sector, but instead as a mechanism for the promotion of existing evidence-based apps, and the development of a new generation of products. Some of which may be AI facilitated using, no pun intended,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

best in class trial methodology. I also rise to support the
16:41
Baroness Harding of Winscombe Portrait Baroness Harding of Winscombe (Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

I also rise to support the amendments for 93 and 494 in the name of Lord Holmes, and 502k and why are in the name of Baroness Kidron. I am not an education Minister, this is my first contribution in this bill. I spent my time in this House focused on digital issues hence my interest in these issues. Like others today I want to start by being really clear that I am not anti-technology in education, quite the opposite.

I see the huge potential that digital technology can bring in all sectors of our lives. And it's particularly clear today, as our Prime Minister is signing the tech prosperity deal. We should be open I'd that technology does bring the opportunity. I am not anti-at all. But it is also really clear that technology, not just digital but all technologies forevermore, need guardrails. And those guardrails can't be self-imposed. Those of us that have worked on child safety online for the past 10 or 15 years, many of us on this side of the House began really firmly believing that self-regulation was the answer.

I'm afraid we have been proven absolutely wrong. There is no doubt that self-regulation in social media has been a disaster. And I fear that we are doing exactly the same in digital technology in education. Companies operating in this space need guardrails in order to develop the products that really will make a positive difference, and to help us all mitigate the downsides that these technologies inherently have. In each example of adding, because I'm not a lover of adding regulation, of adding regulation to the digital space I try to ask myself a simple question.

Is this additional regulation and example of the red Flag act of 1865? For those that don't know that, that was the wonderful piece of legislation that required a man, it had to be a man, with a red flag to walk in front of every non-horse-drawn vehicle. This was clearly a bad piece of legislation, it took 30 years for it to be repealed but it was repealed. Question one, is this piece of additional legislation a red flag act that will prevent the benefit of the technology? Or is it in danger of being a seatbelt? So the seatbelt was patented in 1885, but only became law to be mandated in the back seats of cars, where children tend to sit, in 1991.

So during that century was the world better off? Was car development so much faster because there were not mandatory seatbelt on the back seat? Or did just more children die? I think we have to ask ourselves in every piece of regulation in the digital world, are we in danger of creating a red flag that slows down the development of technology, or are we in danger of believing that regulation is going to slow down that economic growth and instead actually being culpable in doing harm for decades or even centuries? The problem with this bill, and these amendments, is that many of us in this House have debated this issue many times before.

The age-appropriate design code came into being in the 2018 data act, and came to life in 2020. That expressly excludes technology in schools. I find it incomprehensible that five years later we are having to argue that it is wrong that children's data in school is less protected than it is at home. So I know the noble Lady the Minister has referenced before that many of us have spoken on this topic before, or have a track record in this.

The government, when they were not the government, clearly supported expanding regulation into EdTech. And I really hope that the noble Lady the Minister will hear the cross-party support for these amendments and work with us to actually put on the statute book the appropriate protection for children's data and use of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

technology when they are in I would like to move the amendment in my name. It is to probe amendment in my name. It is to probe the government's intention in relation to its own use of data regarding this bill. This amendment addresses an issue that has surfaced repeatedly in our many debates, the scope of data collection about scope of data collection about children and education. We have heard a lot about the role of technology providers, I really want technology providers, I really want to turn the focus onto how we are collecting data within the education
16:47
Lord Wei Portrait Lord Wei (Conservative)
-
-
collecting data within the education system and government. My amendment would ensure that personal data may only be collected, retained, or processed and strictly necessary to protect a child from significant harm as defined in section 31 of the Children Act 1989. This is needed because the Bill as drafted gives wide latitude to local authorities and the Secretary of State to demand data on children not in, an area I care about, as well as potentially on others. In particular the data demanded of children not in, we have already heard about the data collected about children in school is off the scale.

We are told this is for safeguarding. Safeguarding in law has a very specific reason, it is not a licence for information gathering, it is a duty to act when a child is suffering or likely to suffer significant harm. Clause 31, invites local authorities to gather information far beyond what is necessary, such as names, date of birth, and sufficient to identify child oversight duties. The wording allows for much more. Details of parental children's belief, educational philosophy, supplementary dividers, even protected characteristics.

This is a mission creep not proportionate oversight. As the department has acknowledged itself in past consultations, the bare minimum of data to track children and ensure no one fall through the net. To demand more because it might be helpful is our unlawful. Data collection is clear, it must be limited to what is necessary for the purpose. Helpful is not enough. The risks of excessive data collection are not theoretical. Families have already seen sensitive information stored indefinitely. Cross-referenced with other records.

And sometimes shared with agencies in ways they did not consent to know about. One military family I spoke to recounted how the local authority repeatedly contacted the father's workplace about his children, despite clear instructions not to do so. Another home educating mother described after the registering a child with special needs she was followed in public after being wrongly referred to social services. These are intrusions to undermine trust. We must render that not all parents in the system are confident or well resourced.

Some are vulnerable, fleeing domestic abuse, suffering with SEND bureaucracy. For them intrusive data demands feels less like protection and warlike surveillance. If the state is perceived as hostile, families may retreat from engagement altogether making genuine safeguarding harder not easier. That is why my amendment ties in with the section 31 threshold. The threshold is already the bedrock of child protection law. It is the liner courts have drawn between privacy and state intervention. Aligning data powers ensures consistency, legality, and proportionality.

Subsection two ensures proportionality by limiting data to what is essential for the specific risk identified. If concern is neglect, if the concern is radicalisation, focus on that. Do not use safeguarding as a pretext for wide-ranging dossiers on families private lives. Subsection 3 closes off another danger with profiling. We should not be gathering data to build long time April profiles of children or to monitor families against vague benchmarks of compliance. This is social engineering by stealth. Subsection 4 requires the secretary of state to publish clear guidance within six months, so local authorities, schools, parents, and the data of collection.

Some might worry this ties the hands of professionals. On the contrary, it frees them to focus on what matters. Instead of drowning in forms and files and data, they can concentrate on children at genuine risk. Excessive data is not neutral. It diverts time, money, and attention from where it is most needed. International law supports this approach, in the 2012 case, the European Court of Human Rights held that article 8 was breached. And in 2015, the court stressed data collection must be proportionate and relevant.

We cannot claim compliance with article 8 if we allow the harvesting of children's details just in case. This is not just for home educators. It protects every family in the education system, it ensures that schools are not turning to data collection points for the state and ensures that local authorities are not saddled with impossible burden of storing, processing, and protecting sensitive information they don't always need. Above all it protects children from been profiled, stigmatised or surveyed in ways that bear no relation to genuine safeguarding.

In passing this bill we must create a database state by accident. We must legislate with care remembering data is not neutral. It is power, it is the new oil in fact. Used well it can protect used badly it can harm. Amendment 502 ensures power can have limits. It is fair, proportionate, and faithful to the principles of our child protection law. I commend it to the House. it to the House.
16:52
Lord Storey Portrait Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
My Lords, Covid was certainly the rocket fuel for the growth of the education technology in our schools. It is now accepted as part of the school learning landscape. The UK tech education sector is the largest in Europe spending an estimated £900 million a year. However there are real concerns, and these amendments seem to address them. That is why we seem to address them. That is why we will be supporting amendment 493, 52K and the others.

The edtech sector is exempted from the Online sector is exempted from the Online Safety Act. But adherence to the GDPR is inconsistent to say the least. Large quantity platforms such as Google Classroom and Microsoft Teams can enhance teaching and school management, but the absence of clear statutory standards leaves children's education and cyber security often at risk. We surely do need to have a regulated framework to safeguard children's rights, detect the data, and protect the commercial exploitation of children.

We sleepwalked into the development of social media stop and we now see the harm that has been caused. And we rush to try and do something about it. There is a strong case for developing a regulated framework to safeguard children's rights, support schools in making informed sustainable choices. I want to also respond to what I thought was a very thoughtful contribution by Baroness Spielman. It made me think that six years ago, I had a Private Members' Bill on essay Mills and contracts teaching.

That is now all for naught because of course there are other ways of cheating and other AI helps that suitably. I had an intern who one day said to me, a little sorry, here's a speech for you. I said I would have a look. I read the speech and thought, wow, this is great. And he said it is an AI speech. And I thought, I wonder whether in five years, 10 years time, your Lordships House might be a very different place in terms of speeches.

Might we also come not using our own thoughts or expenses by using AI to generate speeches. And would anybody know in five or 10 years time? When the technology is spot on. I want to give briefly with the other 502YU and reception baseline assessment for top the midst of all recall I raised this is an Oral Question. I do think there is something a bit perverse about the youngest children, five-year-old, actually doing online assessments on a screen.

I have a degree of sympathy about the amendment. And I hope the Minister can shed some light on that. On the other two amendments, no it mentions SEND exemptions, but I think Lord Addington made a hugely important contribution for it isn't an either/or. I thing we have to be, in both of those amendments, I thing we have to think through very carefully because there are other issues not just in terms of special educational needs that need to be aware of, and we don't want to increase something which creates problems in the future.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

We have another important group

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We have another important group of amendment which seek to bring Frankie some commonsense principles
16:57
Baroness Barran Portrait Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
Frankie some commonsense principles to the use of edtech children's data and screens. Amendment 493 and 494 in the name of Lord Holmes of Richmond seeks to introduce what would affect be quality standards for the use of edtech in schools. There are existing standards and guidance for schools in relation to hardware data. I was unable to find any in relation to edtech specifically. So it feels like my noble friend has identified a real gap. Similarly amendment 502 Similarly amendment 500 and 2K, would introduce a Code of Practice the efficacy of edtech.

I would suggest that in all of those amendments, we need to be very clear that any standards or principles don't just focus on some of the data and related safety issues that we have talked about. But make sure that they are absolutely based on the latest research and cognitive science, and the best understanding. So they actually deliver learning. We need them to be safe, it is necessary but not sufficient. And we need them to be effective. Last year, a thorough report by the Education Select Committee on the impacts for screen time on education and well-being found that proliferation of edtech platforms made overall benefit hard to quantify and pointed out that only 7% of edtech providers had conducted randomised controlled trials on their products.

The report noted there are over half a million apps aiming to be educational. But as yet no quality standards for assessing educational content. The report judged the evidence base for assessing which, if any, of these apps are most effective as poor. Amendment 493 due to requirement of transparency in relation to the use of training data, AI, and third party use of data. I think it shares the spirit of amendment 502YI in the name of Lady Kidron which would introduce a code of to relation to the processing of data in connection with the provision of education to children.

An area where the introduction of AI tensely expands how children's data will be shared and used. Understanding how our children's data is used is extremely important, as we have heard from noble Lords across the House. It is also important that we can use it. One of the biggest data sources that could move the needle on, for example AI marking systems for formative assessment is held in our national exam scripts. So I think we need to be very intentional also about the areas that we focus on.

I also listened with interest to Lady also listened with interest to Lady Kidron and Lord Russell. On amendment 502YH, it is striking when one reads the amendment have a different standard schools already have to comply with. Keeping children safe in education, the digital technology in schools guidance, the Praet safety expectations for the use of generative AI guidance, all of this makes pen and paper look positively straightforward. But we do need high straightforward. But we do need high In school in particular.

And I think Baroness Kidron was very generous, I'm sure she and I spoke about filtering and monitoring. I definitely did work in the Department, I was disappointed because I knew we put it in the handbook but as the noble Lady was speaking and academies need to be working towards understanding and implementing the standards by 2030. And I hang my head if I signed that off. I wonder whether there is something in the departments of commercial functions that could recommend a list of recommended suppliers, or whether higher standards of security are just a cry to force applying these products to schools.

But it would be interesting to hear what the Minister suggests. Turning to the amendments in my name. These should be seen in the context of the prevalence of connected devices. Devices that are literally designed to distract us. And we know that distraction is bad for academic performance, and it's bad for social and emotional functioning, and it's bad for cognitive control. And of course, as the highly respected Daisy Krista today writes in her book teachers versus tech, which I can't recommend versus tech, which I can't recommend highly enough, there could be a world where devices are redesigned for educational use which removes distractions.

We are not in that world today and until then we need these amendments. My amendment 502 YST is a probing amendment that would give parents the right to opt out of homework. I understand the concern some schools have about the practicality of implementing this but the evidence from young children who did their homework online is that 50 percent reported using social networks and 60 percent were texting while studying. For every 15 minutes of homework time only 10 were spent studying, and pupils switch tasks every six minutes.

This amendment is not about taking autonomy away from teachers or schools, we know that their professional judgement is central. But we must acknowledge we have little reliable evidence of the educational benefits of screen-based homework. Whilst the evidence further harm of excessive springtime is growing. During the lockdown technology was a lifeline for children's learning but there is a risk. As with smartphones, only later are we waking up to the scale of the harms and it would be irresponsible not to pursue stronger evidence before embedding these practices as the norm.

Until we have a full picture it's right to take an opportunity to pause and reflect on what we might be sleepwalking into, and give parents the choice to opt out where they feel device-based homework is not helpful for their child. Reading and handwriting play a critical role in the acquisition and retention of knowledge and in refining memory and comprehension. There is ample research that shows that reliance on technology for writing is detrimentally affecting handwriting skills, leading not only to reduced legibility and slower fluency but also the impairment of memory and comprehension.

My amendment 502YT would require all boards in secondary education to offer exams completed by hand unless proficiency in using the device is part of the subject or where it is more appropriate for a child with special educational needs. Evidence from the OECD shows that computer- based testing can lead to a difference in outcomes and it raises fairness in terms of access to technology and in terms of a capacity to facilitate this in schools. We are also worried about the shift away from play-based activities in the reception-based line of assessment.

And to be clear, we thoroughly support having the assessment, but moving to a touchscreen approach. This would be addressed in my amendment 502 while you. I will quote a letter from the campaigner was part 12. At present resources for testing children's communication language, literacy and early maths skills are admirably and straightforwardly consistent with the approach to early years and decades of pedagogical research showing the centrality of play in building cognitive social and emotional skills.

But in future putting the reception-based line of assessment into devices puts an exception -- an expectation that children will be familiar enough with touchscreen technology to be able to use devices or even that screen usage is vital for school readiness. The procurement contract between DfE and main tech reportedly stipulates the RBA will be the first service launched to schools in a wider suite of digital assessment tools. Maybe the Minister can update the House on where this is going next.

How our children are assessed inevitably drives the method of teaching throughout the school system. The national parent survey revealed this week that already 31 percent of primary school children are expected to have a personal device for schoolwork. If one accepts the digital delivery of education is for a majority of pupils and inferior method, producing inferior outcomes, it remains acutely important that the major assessments including the baseline assessment do not move online. I see these amendments as seatbelts, most definitely, and not seatbelts, most definitely, and not
17:08
Baroness Smith of Malvern Portrait Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think we've had a good I think we've had a good debate here on group 5, which concerns here on group 5, which concerns education technology and device- based assessment. I would like to thank noble Lords for raising the thank noble Lords for raising the important issues of digital and technology standards for schools, technology standards for schools, particularly around inclusion, the procurement and use of effective procurement and use of effective education technology in schools. And I strongly agree with noble Lords that technology must be safe for that technology must be safe for children to use, and effective to support learning and to support teaching and the work of teachers who remain central and fundamental to children's learning.

I am sure to children's learning. I am sure there are important lessons and developments about pedagogy that it developments about pedagogy that it is crucial to engage with, given the is crucial to engage with, given the context of EdTech. Amendments call context of EdTech. Amendments call 93, tabled by Lord Holmes and 502k, 93, tabled by Lord Holmes and 502k, 502 yar, and 502YH tabled by Baroness Kidron seek to regulate educational technology deployed in schools in England.

We share many of the objectives set out by noble Lords here. To ensure quality and safety. This is of course a very fast moving area and we are in the process of both developing standards and the ways in which we can ensure that accountability and the certainty that those standards are being delivered. The Department for Education has set nonstatutory digital and technology standards.. These help schools and colleges make more informed decisions about technology, supporting safer more cost efficient practices and new learning opportunities for students.

Earlier this year the Department consulted on the future of the standards, and in July published a government response to the consultation. Which confirms our ambition for all schools to meet the standards by 2030. The proposals set out in our response to the consultation explore accountability options for technology standards, considering appropriate accountability levels and reviewing standards where they may be cost prohibitive. More broadly we recognise the importance of supporting schools to choose effective technology that is safe for pupils to use and meets educational need.

This is why we set out in the response that we will continue to support schools and colleges with technology standards. A support service, and I do recognise the point made by Baroness Merron that whilst it is important to develop a series of standards in this area, and in fact to revise them, that doesn't make life easy for schools. And the intention behind the support service to plan their technology is to act as a support, a self-assessment guide for schools to be able to be much clearer about how and what they need to do in order to meet the standards and support them in doing that.

This of course is also supported by multi-million pound investment in schools digital and connectivity infrastructure. Just with one specific point with respect to amendment 493, we think this would create significant legal and operational barriers to schools in England as it is more restrictive than the current data protection framework, including the UK GDPR and the data protection act 2018. Requiring schools to hold all data on site we think would be a retrograde step, it wouldn't actually support greater security.

Which I think is the intention. And it would have significant environmental impacts for schools. In response to amendment 494, tabled by Lord Holmes, this amendment seeks to create a new procurement standard for education technology in schools in England. This is a significant development aiming to secure schools procuring digital schools and services. Our digital technology standards already include specific requirements which ensure compliance with safeguarding obligations, we also support schools to choose effective technology that meets their needs, safeguarding obligations through their service plan for technology for schools which I just spoke about.

Turning to amendment 502YH tabled by Baroness Kidron, the amendment seeks to establish a duty on the Secretary of State to set out the minimum standards for filtering and monitoring technologies, and certification by an accredited scheme sanctioned by the Department for education. I am grateful for the noble Lady's previous engagement with me on this topic. I know my officials are keen to continue their regular conversations with the noble Lady, and continue working closely with her on this agenda.

In order to make progress. Statutory guidance keeping children's savings schools makes clear that filtering and monitoring systems should be in place and they should be regularly reviewed. In addition to this the departments digital and technology standards include a filtering requirement that systems should meet to support schools to meet the statutory duties expected of them in keeping children safe in education. Technology is moving fast, ensuring systems keep pace is a challenge we systems keep pace is a challenge we recognise.

In January we published our generative AI product safety expectations framework which states that generative AI products must effectively and reliably prevent access to harmful and inappropriate content by users, and maintain robust activity logging procedures. However, I share the noble Lady's concerns, and those of other noble Lords. We know that a minority of providers who do not meet the standards, we are actively working on options to increase provider compliance and reduce the burden on schools to identify the systems that meet the standards.

There are several ways we might achieve this. Such as by establishing a certification scheme for filtering and monitoring under the UK accreditation service framework. We will take the time to do a full assessment of the impacts and benefits of any new requirements to avoid the risk of creating burdens on the sector, and limiting supply and diversity. We must also make sure we are supporting schools to meet the standards. We consulted schools in March to understand the challenges they face in meeting the filtering and monitoring standards, and while 98 percent of respondents stated they were fully or partially meeting the standards we continue to work through identified barriers to understand priorities for further support.

And I do recognise the point made by the noble Lady about the depth of knowledge necessary in order to be able to make that assertion. And the shift of requirement from schools being expected to make that judgement through to a much clearer certification scheme. Putting the emphasis on the certification of the product as opposed to the requirement for schools to ensure In thinking about how we monitor that, although Ofsted inspectors to assess how well schools implement and review safeguarding policies, including those addressing risks from technology and social media, there were not routinely look at how schools use filtering and monitoring software.

They are not technical experts that can assess the performance of software systems. It is more appropriate that expert bodies assess product performance. And regimes for the certification of products that are safe and fit for purpose already exist. This would allow them to be checked by schools and Ofsted. Assessors do look at how well schools implement and review safeguarding policies including those addressing risks from technology and social media. Turning to amendment 502YI the Information Commissioner's Office as is auditing the practices of edtech providers and is due to publish findings later this year.

They are under commitment to reducing edtech Code of Practice will support schools and edtech providers, to understand the data protection responsibilities to safeguard children's data. The Department for Education will use the outputs of the audit to inform future work on guidance and tools to support schools to understand and discharge the data protection legislative requirements, and the safe use of technology, and better regulate the markets. The departmental data protection officer was engaged on the amendment to the Data (Use and Access) Bill which Baroness Kidron referred to.

It introduced a requirement for the ICO to produce a Code of Practice to support the responsible use of edtech tools in schools. We remain committed through this engagement to ensuring appropriate protections for children's privacy and to safeguard the personal data. We are supporting the commitment to the Code of Practice. The DfE are fully engaged Practice. The DfE are fully engaged with the DSIT and ICO. More broadly, with protecting children's data and data rights, procurement frameworks such as those which we are exploring for management information system providers, and certification schemes for technology providers such as via the UK Accreditation Service, do offer routes to stronger data protection requirements.

And we are actively exploring these routes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Turning now to amendment... Before she sits down, I really

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Before she sits down, I really want to raise the question of timing want to raise the question of timing here. Because the government is putting a huge amount of money into putting a huge amount of money into digital infrastructure, and is later digital infrastructure, and is later amendments say, putting assessment online and so on. I am trying to online and so on. I am trying to understand why it is that takes decades to get the rules in place, decades to get the rules in place, that we have not yet learned the need to put the rules in place as we put the infrastructure in.

I will read very carefully, and I respect the generous way with which the noble Lady the Minister answered. noble Lady the Minister answered. But I'm sitting here as someone who has been fighting for something for has been fighting for something for nearly a decade. That is still being promised sometime before 2030, and promised sometime before 2030, and I'm finding that very difficult to put that together with the idea that we are now making a huge investment we are now making a huge investment in edtech, that this will be central to children's lives.

And that the government will be responsible for the outcomes, and many noble Lords across the House have said we want edtech, we want learning. We want to be part of this movement look at what is happening around the edges. It is not being treated like a safety outcome or indeed an

**** Possible New Speaker ****

inclusive one, as the noble Lord referred to. I hope the noble Lady will read

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I hope the noble Lady will read carefully what I have said. I certainly was not saying, first of certainly was not saying, first of all I think in this response, I have gone further in explaining the work gone further in explaining the work that the Department is doing to meet many of the concerns that she outlined, then we have previously gone. I am most certainly not saying gone. I am most certainly not saying that is to the 2030 timetable.

I that is to the 2030 timetable. I understand her concern around regulation, accountability, I think regulation, accountability, I think I have given some considerable steers at the very least about the direction in which that work is direction in which that work is going. It is not a 2030 timetable.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I want to ask another follow-up question. It is encouraging to hear the work that it sounds like is the work that it sounds like is ongoing in the ICO. I wondered what the Minister's view was on why it the Minister's view was on why it wouldn't be appropriate to put the requirement for a Code of Conduct onto the statute book for education in the same way that it is in the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Age Appropriate Design Code for all other children's data? Just to be clear, I value the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Just to be clear, I value the fact she has been so open about the fact she has been so open about the work that is ongoing but those of us who have worked in the space so long worry that things can change, and codes then disappear without the codes then disappear without the legal underpinning. I understand that concern perhaps we can make that concern perhaps we can make progress on the code as I think we progress on the code as I think we have outlined we are doing.

Perhaps, I will write to the noble Lady about I will write to the noble Lady about this. I do understand this place is this. I do understand this place is about putting things on the face of legislation. That does not mean that there is not activity happening, and there is not activity happening, and I think the proof of the pudding may well be the production of the code.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

well be the production of the code. Briefly before she moves on, when she sent that letter, would she be she sent that letter, would she be very kind and just clarify both the data protection and child safety angles that she talked about which obviously the Information Commissioner's Office would have responsible of T4? But also, explain how the kind of pedagogical elements would be included to make sure these are safe and effective from a learning point of view.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Turning to amendment 502YS tabled by Baroness Barran seeks to confer a by Baroness Barran seeks to confer a right for parents to elect for their good and to have repeated homework test other than by a computer or test other than by a computer or electronic device, I think the noble Lady does make some important points about the sort of totality of the way in which children might be way in which children might be expected to do their homework. The challenges for those children who challenges for those children who would not necessarily have access to the technology in order to be able the technology in order to be able to do that.

However, I do think that to do that. However, I do think that those are decisions, I would be those are decisions, I would be surprised if there were schools expecting children to all of their homework on devices for example. But homework on devices for example. But nevertheless, I think it is still important to maintain the principle, not least I think rightly set out by the last government, and particularly by Damian Hinds when he particularly by Damian Hinds when he was Secretary of State, that decisions over that volume and form of homework are made by schools themselves.

Working in collaboration with staff, pupils, parents, and governors. I'm not sure would be appropriate for the Department to limit the autonomy of schools setting their own policies on homework. Of course it is right that schools should consider providing alternative options for pupils to complete homework where device access is limited, and also of course should consider the implications for things like handwriting. For other ways of learning and completing work that I think the noble Lady was right to identify.

We understand the concerns around the potential harms of unmonitored and unlimited personal screen use. But I do think it is helpful in this debate to consider the distinctions between personal screen time and educational screen time. I don't think those should necessarily be conflated. It is not a question of screen use per se, but a question of screen use per se, but what children and are using the screens for, and what activities it supports. And importantly, and I do agree with this, what activities it replaces.

Effective use of technology can improve education access and outcomes, and reduce staff workload. We trust teachers and leaders to use these tools appropriately which includes their use to complete homework. Beyond this of course, as we have discussed previously, it is also important to recognise assistive technology can go a long way to supporting children with particular needs, a point frequently and rightly made by Lord frequently and rightly made by Lord Addington. Turning to amendment 502YT and 502YU tabled by Baroness Barran.

The first seeks to ensure that secondary education exams are completed by hand rather than digital device, subject to exceptions. Are currently working closely with Ofcom to review evidence and develop policy on any potential future use of on-screen exams. There are already a small number of exams which are offered digitally. I think A-level music technology for example she sign language GCSE, which I think it would be impossible to do unless it was done digitally. Some Functional Skills exams for example which, by nature, the point at which they are taken need to be done digitally.

But of course the chief regulator has said publicly that any further introduction of on-screen exams should be treated with extreme caution and must be fair, proportionate, and manageable. And we agree about that. It would not be appropriate, however, to fix a policy position into legislation before the opportunities risks and implications of on-screen exams have been fully considered in detail. An Ofqual is responsible for regulating qualifications and examinations. We expect that any changes to their regulatory framework would be subject to full public consultation in due course.

Amendment 502YU seeks to ensure the baseline assessment is not limited to digital devices subject to some exceptions. It might be helpful for me to explain how this assessment in reality works. I think there is a general consensus but it is important for us to be able to assess the development of children at the beginning of their time in schools. That is the point of the Reception Baseline Assessment. It is carried out Assessment. It is carried out individually, with pupils.

It takes between 15 minutes and 20 minutes, roughly half of it is carried out with a teacher sitting next to a single pupil. Using the screen in a way that I think people would not allow them to do. For example, to point at things, to move things into different orders. It retains the overall assessment retains the use of verbal responses. It retains the use of toys for other questions for the other half of the assessment,.

It does bring benefits including reduced workload for teachers and better support for pupils special educational needs and disabilities. Using for example the assessment built-in accessibility settings. There is no expectation in relation to one of the points noble Lady made, there is no expectation that the people has experience of screen use. The teacher can input the answers for the people if need be because it is a person-to-person assessment that is essentially being carried out. The new version, which was introduced in September 2025 had actually been trialled extensively with pupils in schools since 2018.

And has been well received. A paper-based version continues to be available, in circumstances where this is more suitable for the child. I hope that provides some reassurance to noble Lords because I have responded to questions on this on more than one occasion. It does feel to me that withdrawing at this point something that has been trialled over a considerable period of time, starting of course under the previous government, and which is, in terms of the timescales where it would be difficult if not infeasible to deliver a replacement in time to carry out this really important baseline assessment, for all of those reasons, I hope that I provided some reassurance about both the nature and the development of this assessment.

There are much this assessment. There are much broader conversations that it is obviously appropriate for us to have about the use of screens in an early years setting and in schools, some of which we have had in earlier amendments, and which I'm sure we will continue to have. But I genuinely believe, for this particular usage, removing it would be disproportionate even given the concerns that noble Lords have expressed. Turning to amendment 502YQ which seeks to restrict personal data collected by schools and as it relates to arm.

We did discuss that data protection issues surrounding children in school registers and some considerable length in the time that we devoted length in the time that we devoted Earlier on in this committee. But we share a commitment to protecting children's privacy, but safeguarding is not just responding once harm has occurred it's about preventing it. Schools can notice patterns of concerning needs, in the last year alone 126,000 referrals were made from schools to children social care.

Beyond safeguarding, schools have a range of responsibilities that require them to collect and use data effectively, restricting their ability to do so would not only hinder their work but could leave them open to legal challenge for failing to meet their statutory duties. Elsewhere in the bill we are rightly strengthening the role of education in childcare settings with safeguarding arrangements to a shift to prevention at the heart of our reforms. This is not about self surveillance, it's about ensuring when a child needs help the system sees them, he has them and acts.

For all those reasons, I hope noble Lords will feel able to withdraw their amendments. their amendments.
17:33
Lord Holmes of Richmond Portrait Lord Holmes of Richmond (Conservative)
-
-
Can I thank all those who participated in this critically important debate. EdTech has such a profound possibilities for all learners, be they in-school, in-home learning environments, in any environment where education is taking place. But it's obviously crucial to be cognisant of the risks attendant. As I said earlier, if we take a principles-based outcomes focused inputs understood approach, and we human lead on these technologies, we can feel the confidence that we are putting technologies in place that will be enabling, empowering for children and young people, but for children and a whole school and home learning and all education environments.

This matter could barely be more up to the minute with technologies already being widely deployed across all learning environments. For this learning environments. For this reason, and the great fortune of this bill now being in your Lordship's House, I'm sure we will return to these matters in report. But for now, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Amendment by leave withdrawn. It may be for the convenience of the may be for the convenience of the house and Lord Holmes if I take house and Lord Holmes if I take amendment 494 to 500 to 501 block, amendment 494 to 500 to 501 block, not moved. Amendment 501, Lord not moved. Amendment 501, Lord Storey, not moved. And 502 a, not Storey, not moved. And 502 a, not moved. And 502B, Baroness Bennett, not moved. We now come to the group not moved.

We now come to the group beginning with amendment 500 and 2C, beginning with amendment 500 and 2C, Lord Northbrook -- Lord Northbrook.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

To my count there are almost 20 amendments to the bill requiring the amendments to the bill requiring the Secretary of State within six or 12 months of the act being passed to promulgate some regulations or undertake a review of a particular undertake a review of a particular revision of the act. My amendment is more comprehensive and adopts a
17:36
Lord Norton of Louth Portrait Lord Norton of Louth (Conservative)
-
-
more comprehensive and adopts a longer timeframe. It requires the Secretary of State within five years of the passage of the act to undertake a review of its operation. And effect. The wording is the same as that of an amendment I tabled to the Employment Rights Bill, and has the same justification. Post- legislative scrutiny is essential for ensuring the law we enact meets the various criteria of good law. We cannot know that it does without undertaking a thorough review, and in effect completing a legislative feedback loop.

There is no point in enacting legislation that then fails to deliver what it is intended to deliver, and for us to proceed essentially in ignorance of its effects. The case for postal review has been accepted by governments since 2008, with a commitment to reviewing most acts three to five years after enactment. Ministers have variously reiterated that commitment. However, not all departments are rigourous in complying with it. The government has also introduced a get out clause, saying there may not be a review if following correspondence with the chair of the relevant departmental select committee it is agreed a review might not be necessary.

As I pointed out when Lady Twycross reported this, it's not clear how a chair will know a review is not necessary without undertaking some initial review. It's also not clear why this House is excluded from the process. As I argued on the Employment Rights Bill, there is a case for putting on the face of a measure provision for post-legislative scrutiny where the bill is large, complex, makes substantial changes to the law, is contested and has not been subject to pre-legislative scrutiny.

This bill is clearly substantial, both in length and content. It makes a major change to educational law in this country. It has been characterised by Lord Lucas as striking at the heart of the relationship between parents and the government. It's clearly engendered strong opinions, we have had extensive debate, 12 days in committee, as to its likely effects. It has also been introduced without pre-legislative scrutiny. Making provision on the face of the bill for post-legislative scrutiny will enable all the claims made as to the effects of the bill to be tested.

Including such a provision will also help reassure critics of the bill that there will be such a review. That may help the process of getting the bill through. The Minister may say the amendment is unnecessary given that the bill will qualify automatically for review three to five years after enactment. Making a clear commitment at the Dispatch Box putting on the official record that the bill will be subject to post review is obviously valuable. We got such a commit meant on the implement rights bill.

However, as I pointed out in debate on that bill, the wording of my amendment derives from the government's own amendment to the Football Governance Bill. The government, to their credit, accepted the argument for putting provision for post-legislative scrutiny on the face of the bill and brought forward their own amendment. The grounds for doing so apply in The grounds for doing so apply in the case of this bill. As I say, it would be welcome to have a commitment at the Dispatch Box that there will be post-legislative scrutiny, but it will be even better to enshrine it in the bill.

Putting it on the face of the bill would demonstrate the government are confident the government will deliver on what it is intended to deliver. If the Minister resists the amendment it will be helpful to hear from her how she distinguishes this bill from the Football Governance Bill in terms of the merits of putting post-legislative scrutiny on the face of the bill. Does she or does she not accept that good law is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

a public good? I beg to move. Amendment proposed, after clause
17:40
Lord Wei Portrait Lord Wei (Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Amendment proposed, after clause 62 insert the new clause is printed on the Marshall list.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

on the Marshall list. I rise to speak to amendment 502

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to speak to amendment 502 YN and 502 why are in my name. These are bound by a common theme that the are bound by a common theme that the powers recreate in this bill must be effective, proportionate and accountable. Not only in ordinary times but in times of crisis when authoritarian temptations are stronger. 502 YN would establish an annual review of all measures in the bill. Each year the Secretary of State would be required to test whether those measures are achieving their stated purpose, and whether they are doing so without imposing unnecessary or disproportionate burdens on parents, children, schools, providers or the department itself.

Where a measure fails it should be amended or repealed, and if no action is taken within two years it must lapse. This is about accountability cutting both ways. Families, schools, community groups, huge numbers of stakeholders are being asked to account for children's education for topics only fair government accounts for the bills it passes. We have talked about bureaucracy and admission is free, in principle such a register might help identify who is being educated outside mainstream settings.

In practice the bill demands far more data than needed. In Portsmouth more than 70 percent of educated children have already been served notices or orders annually, closer to the national average of one percent. They will suffer when children's, social workers will have to spend more time filling in forms and supporting them, parents treated of suspicion because they chose to educate differently, draining morale and resources. Providers may be chilled by A1 size fits fits all rule. Immunities and charities often the lifeline for struggling families and children will find scarce time.

We have seen where unchecked bureaucracy leads, the database was launched with the best intentions, it collapsed and was ultimately abandoned. Scotland's main person scheme likewise promised protection and in practice extended excessive authority. This shows what happens when there is no obligation to review and no Sunset clause the cutaway what doesn't work. Yet the risks are not only of inefficiency, there is something deeper. Bureaucracy when excessive is not neutral, it becomes a means of control. It erodes freedom by coercion but by endless demands that exhaust and intimidate until families, schools and communities yield.

That's why amendment 502 why are is so important, it recognises powers created in good faith can one day be misused. It requires a mechanism be ready so that if any national emergency or period of authoritarian governance courts retain the authority to -- in their children's education. We can't ignore the political context in Europe and beyond, we see the rise of extremes in the left and right. Authoritarian governments rarely declare themselves at the outset. They often begin with education, the use registers and guidance powers not to support families but to control them.

They oppose ideological curricula, they marginalise communities of faith, they stifle dissent in the classroom. Disturbingly elements of this bill draw inspiration, whether knowingly or not, from an unlikely and troubling source. The original departmental human rights justification cited first state intervention to justify state intervention in home education, it rose from a case in Germany where a home education parent was prosecuted on laws dating back to the 1930s. These laws introduced under Hitler's regime banned home teaching in Germany. It's disturbing our arguments now echo a system designed not to protect children but to eliminate educational clause.

One that our own national wartime government in the 1940s sought to fight giving parents the ultimate say over their children's education. We must not follow that path, must not allow powers framed by safeguards to evolve into machinery that stifles freedom. This is not to deny the state its proper role in protecting children, safeguarding is vital but safeguarding fails when systems chase compliance rather than risk. When form filling, when bureaucracy becomes the end and not the means. In such a climate children most in need and families acting responsibly and schools are burdened and alienated.

The two amendments before us are modest disciplines against such outcomes. The first creates a feedback loop, element learns from the real-world impact of its laws and correct scores when necessary. The second ensures that when times go dark there is a constitutional anchor that guards against authoritarian misuse ensuring parental privacy in education is never extinguished by bureaucratic or dictatorial creep. Together they protect not only parents but schools, children and communities, they rebuild trust that the state will focus energy where it matters most and relinquish powers that do more harm than good.

If this bill is to endure it must not only do well in fair weather, it must be robust enough to stand foul weather as well, to guard against inefficiency at normal times and authoritarian use in extraordinary ones. These amendments ask laws be ones. These amendments ask laws be judged by their fruits. This is how we protect children more effectively, support families more fairly, and preserve freedom more securely. I commend these amendments securely. I commend these amendments
17:47
Lord Watson of Invergowrie Portrait Lord Watson of Invergowrie (Labour)
-
-
I rise to speak to amendment 505C. If it appears something of an outlier it is because it is. It would have been more appropriate for this to be introduced under part one of the bill. But I have to be honest and say that, at that time, I was unaware of it as an issue. Although being even more honest, and I've been following the regress of the Mental Health Bill, I may well have been. I would like to acknowledge the assistance of the clerks in the Public Bill Office for finding somewhere to hang this.

And the law reform charity for briefings and context. Whatever the view of noble Lords on contracting out vital public services, I'm confident enough to say that no one on a side of the House wants people to be treated less decently and with fewer human rights because of services being provided by outside contractors rather than directly. Human Rights Act is an essential tool for individuals to hold public bodies to account. It requires public authorities to back incompatibility with the rights, and the European Convention of Human Rights.

This definition of a public authority has been narrowly interpreted by the courts will stop in the 2008 case it was found that primary care home is not the authority despite the funding being provided by the local authority. In the years have seen a large expansion of core government services contracted out to the private sector. Leading to an accountability gap in our human rights legislation. In the care sector, more than 80% of children's homes and are run by private companies, and that is an increase of 20% since 2010, and the figure continues to rise.

2014 an attempt was made to feel that accountability gap for caring provision with the Care Act of that year. Coalition government made clear that " All providers are publicly arranged care services must consider themselves bound by the Human Rights Act including private providers under contracts with local authorities. " A 2024 case demonstrated this was not sufficient. A man with a chronic and treatment resistant schizophrenia it was clear treatment have been funded by accommodation Manchester City Council and NHS trust, and he sadly died.

Family brought a claim against the provider and the trust arguing his death resulted from private providers breaches of Human Rights Act. The High Court struck out the human rights aspect of the claim, believing his circumstances fell outside the scope of the provisions of section 73 of the Care Act. The ruling highlights certificate wider concerns from commissioner for children's health and social services, although they are not covered by section 73 of the Care Act. As things stand, a private provider does not have human rights obligations to children in publicly funded care.

I believe this is particularly important given the scale of outsourcing in the social scale of outsourcing in the social care market. 90% of children social care services were shut down by Ofsted not meeting standards to protect children where there was evidence of harm. Since 4/5 children's homes operated for profit companies, there are reasons to be concerned about how well children's human rights are protected in that sector. Children's care settings provide services to some of the most vulnerable children in our society.

As the Children's Commissioner said in highlighting this last year, " Children in care of the most prescribed rights in law yet these rights often least reflected in their experience. " She went on to say " We cannot meet children's rights if our public services are of sufficient quality to provide what children need. " In January when this bill had the second reading of the other place, the Secretary of State stated that the bill. Vulnerable children falling through the cracks. The Human Rights Act is a crucial safeguard for individuals up and down this country on a day- to-day basis, particularly those who rely on the state.

As the Care Quality Commission set out in 2023, the focus on human rights helps us fulfil our duties and purpose by meeting our legal obligations. However, today people do fall through the cracks, not just young people. The uncertainty of the law means providers bear knows direct statutory obligation to act compatibly with children's ECHR rights, and the children, and by definition the families, they have no direct remedy against private providers for human rights violations. This bill is an important opportunity to extend human rights protections to all those who carry out children's care irrespective of who the provider is.

It is not sufficient to say that it may be possible for claim to be brought against local authority. Why should parents be required to do that? Joint Committee on Human Rights dealt with this during the passage of the Care Act in 2014 and concluded the inadequacy of such protection has long been a matter of concern. It has also been a cross- party position for many years that those in publicly funded care deserve full human rights protections, and that providers must be directly accountable for breaching human rights.

As was demonstrated by that cross-party support to change the law in the Mental Health Bill earlier this year. During report stage of that bill, an amendment was proposed by my noble friend Baroness Healy, in relation to mental health care, my noble friend Baroness Blake said the government would " Be particularly conscious of reference to children's services and it was an issue we have been discussing carefully. " My noble friend plans to take the matter forward and she did effectively because this has resulted in what is now clause 52 of that bill which amends the Human Rights Act 1998.

It states " Registered care provider is to be regarded for the purposes of section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 as exercising a function of a public nature providing any of the services mentioned in subsection two to the extent they would not otherwise be so regarded. The Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill is an important opportunity to ensure all private providers of children's services commissioned by local authorities, in social care, education, or disability -related services, are treated as public authorities under the Human Rights Act.

I hope the Minister will signify the government intends to follow the lead of ministerial colleagues in the Mental Health Bill when this bill has its report stage. If she is unwilling or unable to do so I hope she will arrange for the statement called for to be published. published.
17:54
Baroness Barran Portrait Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
My Lords, as we have heard, this group of amendments would potentially introduce a number of reviews in the bill. Those in the name of my noble friend also seek to contain and limit the new powers in the bill in relation to home education of children. My noble friend Lord Norton, his amendment 502C would introduce review of the act after five years. My noble friend made it articulate a clear case for this. As my noble friend said, there were over 20 examples already in amendments seeking reviews of different parts of the bill.

And although upper most certainly in my mind the concerns about part two of the bill we have debated more recently, those of us with long memories can remember some of the concerns about the pace and evidence base for the reforms to the children's social care in part one of the bill. I thought the criteria that my noble friend set out, namely that it should be a substantial bill. I think on day 12 we can agree this is a substantial bill.

It is introducing major changes. It is unquestionably being controversial, and subject to legislative scrutiny. The strongest point is it does allow the government to demonstrate its confidence that the bill will deliver on that changes that the government seeks to seal, and the impact that the government desires. I hope very much the noble Lady will be able to accept my noble friend's amendment. Amendment 505C in the name of Lord Watson, very ably presented to the House.

It highlights concerns about responsibilities of private providers in children's social care, in relation to children's human rights. I think again it would be helpful to hear the Minister's response to this. From my part, I suppose I would refer the government's focus to be on the quality of care that children receive when they are in local authority care, and in a children's home or potentially foster care. As in this case. They already have considerable rights, as the noble Lord says, and what we need is a culture in the organisations to make sure that children receive the care they say very rightly deserve.

they say very rightly deserve.
17:57
Lord Addington Portrait Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
If I briefly say, the principle of reviewing legislation is one that I think we all agree to and no government has ever felt terribly convenient. I hope we can get something going, some commitment by the government that they will look at what happens with some structural review. The unforeseen is something which no degree of planning now can

**** Possible New Speaker ****

ever adjust to. The amendments in this group cover a wide range of issues in cover a wide range of issues in relation to this bill review of the act, this application and commencement. I will begin with amendment 502YR which seeks to amendment 502YR which seeks to protect the parents right to determine their child's education in the event of an emergency, or an authoritarian government by placing judicial oversight above executive restrictions. This amendment restrictions. This amendment actually be ineffective.

As quite rightly, Parliament is sovereign. rightly, Parliament is sovereign. Any law passed by a current Parliament can be changed or repealed by future Parliament. Providing education and child received is safe and suitable, existing legislation makes clear existing legislation makes clear that most parents have the right to determine the form of education that determine the form of education that best meet their child's needs. This was discussed at length through the course of the Committee stage, and course of the Committee stage, and the bill does not change that.

Turning to amendment 502C, on Turning to amendment 502C, on reviewing the act. Can I start by commending the noble Lord and commitment to Post-legislative scrutiny. He himself identified that this has been government policy
17:59
Baroness Smith of Malvern Portrait Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
-
-
since 2008. And part of the process since 2008. And part of the process for legislative progress throughout for legislative progress throughout this House. I remember the this House. I remember the discussions around making it, putting it into that position, in my putting it into that position, in my last period of time in this House. I supported it then, I still support it now. The interim period, between it now. The interim period, between 2010 and 2024, amongst a range of things that I was able to do, I was things that I was able to do, I was very pleased to be able to advise foreign governments about the significance of, or foreign parliaments sorry, about the significance of Post-legislative scrutiny drawing precisely on the work of the noble Lord and the work of the noble Lord and the experiences of this Parliament in putting those into operation.

Alongside that amendment, we have Alongside that amendment, we have amendment 502YN tabled by Lord Wei which concerns a review of the operation of the bill's measures. This government agrees on the importance of having an appropriate mechanism for the proper evaluation of the impact of legislation, and ensuring it meets the gold it sets out to deliver. Especially given the size and wide ranging ambitions of the spill. I can assure noble Lords that this bill will of course be subject to post-lead scrutiny in the usual way without this amendment.

We fully expect evaluation will be carried out within the first five years of the legislation Coming into force. We recognise the importance of monitoring our progress in a timely and transparent way. So in addition to Post-legislative scrutiny, we have already published our plans for monitoring and evaluation in the impact assessment for this bill. We will have spoke reviews of policies that will be carried out at A-level or groups measured level depending which is appropriate depending on metrics and objectives.

We intends to carry out a post of limitation review of the bill. And many of the powers to create secondary legislation in this bill stipulates that such secondary legislation will be subject to the affirmative procedure's. This will give Parliament the opportunity to further scrutinise and debate our plans. Regarding amendment 502YN tabled by Lord Wei, it is not this government's intention to impose unnecessary disproportionate burden is on the sector. We have been clear about the bill is expected benefits, costs, in a published regulatory impact and, which was rated as fit for purpose by the Regulatory Policy Committee.

As stated in that impact assessment, we anticipate the overall impact on society if this bill were passed to be positive. Where there are additional costs to businesses and households, these have been minimised as far as possible, and are considered importunate to achieve the positive safety, well-being, education, and financial benefits to children and families. One of course the government will take action with a post invitation review of the bill, as per the Better Regulation framework identifies and objectives are yet to be met where improvements could be made.

It would not necessarily be proportionate to repeal measures or make legislative changes in the way in which this amendment proposes. The government wants the facility to consider the wants the facility to consider the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

One clarification, understanding having spoken to those who know about the workings of the policy committee which apparently the Minister said greenlighted this bill, is that in the last few years bill, is that in the last few years they have not actually been allowed to ask for submissions upon receiving the draft bill to scrutinise whether that bill fits within the good regular three within the good regular three framework we all would like to see. framework we all would like to see.

So the information that had to greenlight this bill think was very limited indeed because if you can't ask people what they think of the ask people what they think of the bill then obviously any information you have is very limited and you can you have is very limited and you can only go what you been given. Which is further ammunition I think the point that this bill needs a lot of scrutiny because it hasn't really scrutiny because it hasn't really had knee before it was even brought

**** Possible New Speaker ****

before. Just on the point about the Regulatory Policy Committee, the regulator policy committee did have the benefit of our published Regulatory Impact Assessment of Regulatory Impact Assessment of course to review, and wider comments course to review, and wider comments about the efficacy of the regular three policy committee I think of for the noble Lord to make to them rather than use as a stick to beat this particular bill and frankly as we are coming to the end nearly of day 12 of committee on this bill the idea that it has not had sufficient scrutiny I think is frankly laughable given the time and care was also spent in the other place which has been massively exceeded by the time and care that has been spent by noble Lords in this House during the course of this committee.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will if necessary. Just to clarify the words I used

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Just to clarify the words I used were before it got brought to all of were before it got brought to all of this place. I think the reason why it had so many data scrutiny is because it wasn't drafted in a way that was appropriate. We spent so that was appropriate. We spent so much time, you can't believe how many nights and days we will have to work on this, I think if we could have built in future that had a have built in future that had a little bit more effort put in to their drafting by policymakers and others we could use the time this House very very well.

Not House very very well. Not criticising or saying the work of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this House is wasted in fact it's very necessary to get us where we are today. The noble Lord is right that noble Lords have spent considerable hours on this, some more than others I think it would be fair to say. I think it would be fair to say. Moving onto amendment 505C table by Moving onto amendment 505C table by Moving onto amendment 505C table by Lord Watson of Invergowrie seeking assurances via published statement on how the Human Rights Act 1998 applies to private providers of publicly funded children Social care services, this amendment is seeking a pause in the commencement of section 12 to 18 of this bill until such statement is made.

These sections cover measures relating to providers and put financial oversight, profit caps, OFSTED and Secretary of State powers to impose monetary penalties and information sharing between OFSTED and the Secretary of State. I thank my noble friend for bringing important human rights consideration to our can -- attention, protecting the human rights of all children is of paramount importance and this bill is delivering a number of important measures to stop vulnerable children falling through crack and services. I would like, I completely understand the reasoning behind my noble friend's amendment and I would like to provide this House with reassurances in the robustness and broad applicability of the human rights legal framework including four children Social care services.

Section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 makes it unlawful for public authorities to act in compatibly with the European Convention on Human Rights and this duty extends to private providers when they are performing functions of a public nature. There is no statutory definition of functions of a public nature but relevant factors considered by the courts include the extent to which the body in carrying out the relevant function is publicly funded, exercising statutory powers, taking the place of central government or local authorities or providing a public service.

This broad scope approach is intentional to ensure that a wide range of services can be captured as appropriate. Any statement that the government makes as proposed by my noble friend would not be legally binding, a determination of whether a provider is carrying out functions of a public nature and is therefore in scope of the Human Rights Act is one for courts to determine based on the facts in each specific case. However, to be clear, the government's position is that where a court required to decide whether the private provision of core children's social care services, services that legal, local -- local authorities are legally required to provide, falls in scope of the Human Rights Act 1998 we believe that the court would conclude that they are indeed performing a function of public nature and would therefore be in scope.

The noble Lord has, my noble friend sorry has identified the distinction between the approach taken here and the approach taken in the mental health bill and of course as he said, DHSC making explicit within the Mental Health Bill that certain mental health services are deemed to be exercising a public function for the purposes of the Human Rights Act. These amendments are being made following case law that identified a gap, some of which my noble friend reference I think, case law that identified a gap in the application of the HRA to the private provision of services in question.

Has been no such gap identified through case law in relation to private provision of children Social care services. Therefore our view is that no clarification of the law is necessary for the services and as I have emphasised, we continue to be, of the view that the private provision of core coaching -- children Social care services would be considered to be within scope of the Human Rights Act I suspect that my noble friend and pushing me might say well why don't we take a belt and braces approach here anyway? And their the issue is that attempting to provide further specificity around certain services does risk other services being unintentionally excluded by virtue of their omission.

This is the way as I understand it lawyers tend to work. Just emphasise again we are content that Human Rights Act is currently drafted is flexible enough to capture those functions that need to be within scope of the Human Rights Act 1998 and we do believe that it would be the case that would be upheld in any case with respect to children Social care services. It is also important to remember that children Social care is a highly regulated sector subject to inspection and accountability processes aimed at keeping children safe and promoting their best interests.

The local authority arranging or finding the relevant service would also always be within scope of the Human Rights Act in the exercise of its functions as a core public authority. On this basis I hope my noble friend might be reassured and we do not consider it necessary or appropriate to delay the commencement of other important bill measures that are designed to ensure children in relevant settings are protected. We are confident in the existing legal framework and hope that we have provided a necessary reassurances and statements here today to reassure him.

I hope given my responses that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

noble Lords would feel able to withdraw their amendments. Kai Thankur very much for that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Kai Thankur very much for that very full response to amendment 500 -- 505C, I'm not a lawyer so whether -- 505C, I'm not a lawyer so whether I accept that this data can't say I I accept that this data can't say I would like the opportunity to discuss with her before report, perhaps with some legal support on perhaps with some legal support on those points. She has clearly gone into it deeply and appreciate that. into it deeply and appreciate that.

Can I just say in closing, my noble friend talked about the extent to which this bill has been subjected which this bill has been subjected to scrutiny and committee. I've been here 22 years now and I don't remember any bill having had 12 days remember any bill having had 12 days and committee and I checked, we and committee and I checked, we started this committee on 20 May fully four months ago side of the fully four months ago side of the anyone can say it hasn't had proper scrutiny, I would just like to draw the analogy, my noble friend mentioned earlier that she had run a 10k at the weekend, I imagine that 10k at the weekend, I imagine that must have felt literally like a walk in the park compared to steering this bill through and I thank her this bill through and I thank her and her ministerial colleagues and whips.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

whips. Kai says my noble friend that I am more than happy to meet with him and to bring those legal minds with me that I hope will enable him to be reassured. Given that this is the last group that I'm going to be responding to and this Committee stage can I also thank him 40 said about this Committee stage, it has been lengthy but it has been usually carried out in a I think respectful, amicable and constructive way and for that I would like to thank particularly the opposition Front Benchers, obviously my excellent Benchers, obviously my excellent whip and co-responder Baroness Blake and I agree with my noble friend that I don't think anybody could say that we haven't done our jobs as legislators in this place in giving this a well and truly good going over.

Thank you for those who have been involved in that. been involved in that.
18:14
Lord Norton of Louth Portrait Lord Norton of Louth (Conservative)
-
-
Given that as the Minister said she is just bringing to a conclusion her 12 days and committee on the bill I was rather hoping she may be a little demob happy and put aside her brief and accept the amendment. IMac naturally welcome the commitment that the bill will be reviewed within five years for the reasons I developed, deeply putting commitment on the face of the bill is the preferable option. As I trust was clear from what I said I don't believe putting such a provision on the face of the bill should apply to all or even most bills, but only those that meet the criteria I detailed.

Providing for such a scrutiny imposes a valuable discipline in drafting the measure, stimulating ministers to think about the criteria by which one would know whether an active actually achieved what is intended to achieve. That is not always clear. It would also demonstrate the government's confidence in the bill to achieve its purpose. The arguments for doing this as I said are the same as those accepted by the government on the football governance act. This is an important issue, not least for the health of the statute book.

We rather missed the significance of such a provisions long with commencement orders by sticking them at the end of bills. Think we need to look at that again, but that is a matter for I will be pursuing on another day. Given the importance of ensuring good law, I may return to the issue on report but for the moment I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Is that your government's pledge of the amendment is withdrawn? Amendment is by leave withdrawn. Amendment 500 and 2D not moved. Amendment 500 and 2D not moved. Amendment five OTE not moved. Amendment five OTE not moved. Amendment 502F Lord Banner not Amendment 502F Lord Banner not moved. Amendment 502G not moved. Amendment 502H Lord Moynihan not Amendment 502H Lord Moynihan not moved. Amendment 502J Lord Moynihan moved. Amendment 502J Lord Moynihan
18:16
Lord Young of Acton Portrait Lord Young of Acton (Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

You are right. 502. I rise to proposed amendment 502,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to proposed amendment 502, M, which will create a statutory duty to keep schools open for in- duty to keep schools open for in- person attendance in future public health and other civil emergencies, unless Parliament expressly approves any closures and continues to approve them every two weeks. We await the conclusions of the UK COVID-19 enquiry but I think it is now widely accepted that closing schools during the pandemic was a mistake. The evidence that it had catastrophic impact on children is overwhelming.

I'm thinking of the research published by OFSTED in April 2022 when my noble friend Baroness Spielman was at its head, based on inspection evidence which highlighted delays in children's speech and language progress and the negative impact on children's personal social and emotional development. I'm thinking of the research published by the IFS, the educational endowment fund and the Social Mobility Commission, detailing the persistent and highly damaging impacts of school closures, in terms of exacerbating inequalities and reversing progress previously made in narrowing the attainment gap.

I'm thinking of the work done by the Centre for Social Justice showing that some children who were told to stay at home during the pandemic never reacquired the habit of attending schools, with severe absences defined as missing at least 50% of lessons, tripling compared to pre-pandemic levels, compared to pre-pandemic levels, meaning over 1,700 schoolchildren were severely absent in the summer of 2024. The number of persistently absent children defined as missing at least 10% of lessons climbed to 1.6 million last summer.

I'm thinking of the data curated by children and your people now, about the deterioration in children's mental health since the school closures, with 1.3 million schoolchildren being referred to mental health support services in the school year 2023/24, a 71% increase on the pre-pandemic year of 2018 /19. Some will argue these costs will undoubtedly -- were outweighed by the benefits in terms of affections averted and lives saved but children were at negligible risk from COVID-19. According to the ONS in England and Wales, between March 2020 and October.

According to the ONS in England and Wales, between March 2020 and October 2022, there were 88 deaths registered as due to COVID-19 for children aged under the age of 18. That's 0.05 of the total number, sorry, 0.05 of the % of the total number of deaths and those who. Between 1 April 2019 and 31 March 2022, 644 children died -- from accidents. Many events closing event not make children less likely to become infected. A study published by the public of agency of Sweden in 2020 found that infection rates were no higher amongst schoolchildren in Sweden which closed sixth forms but no other schools than there were in Finland which closed all schools.

Finland which closed all schools. What about adults? The closing schools protect them? We are in the realm of counterfactual is but a look at Sweden again the evidence is that no, keeping schools open did not mean more people were at risk of becoming infected and dying from COVID-19. According to the ONS Sweden's overall excess mortality between March 2020 and July 2022 was negative, i.e., lower than the previous -- pre-pandemic average and far lower in the UK in the UK where schools were closed.

Excess mortality of Sweden was the lowest of all European countries except Norway. Incidentally, Norway did close schools but the Prime Minister at the time actually apologised for doing so. So the cost of closing schools were almost incalculable the benefits non-existent. It was, my Lords, a catastrophic error. Nevertheless, this amendment doesn't rule out the closing schools again, during future public health or civil -- civic amenities was to all it does is make it a statutory requirement to seek the advice of the Children's Commissioner on the likely impact of such action on the children and people affected by it and have due regard for the Children's Commissioner's advice and make it necessary to secure the approval of Parliament with such approval needing to be renewed every two weeks if schools are to remain closed.

It was a mistake to close schools in the pandemic and we should take whatever steps we can to avoid making it again. I beg to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

move. Amendment proposed, insert the
18:22
Lord Brady of Altrincham Portrait Lord Brady of Altrincham (Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Amendment proposed, insert the new clause, due to keep schools open for in-person attendance.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for in-person attendance. I'm very pleased to follow my noble friend in supporting the amendment on the Order Paper. Conscious of the hour I shall be brief in my remarks. But really to endorse the point that my noble friend made, this is a modest amendment and only really seeks to place a duty on ministers to do something that we surely would all wish them to do anyway. But crucially important because it seeks to make that two terror of closing schools during the COVID pandemic far less likely to be repeated.

Many of us thought at the time that it was a mistake to engage in productive school closures and that The harms were always going to be significant but the evidence since the end of the COVID restrictions is minimal and has pointed out suggests that our fears five years ago were actually a gross underestimate of the damage that would be done to children and young people, the repeated lockdowns and school closures constituted the biggest public policy disaster in one history in my view.

In fact that the interests of children and people were treated so politely is a disgrace. The damage to mental health, education, levels of school attendance, have all been profound and continue to be, and the lessons from Sweden, from Florida and those few places around the world, that had more measured and intelligent approaches is proof that many of instructions delivered little if any benefit whilst doing immense damage. This amendment would ensure that should they be pressure to repeat school closures in the future, the government response would have to be transparent and the criteria used to decide on school closures would have to be clear and available to the public and would ensure that Parliament would have a role in making those decisions and avoid the parliament was denied during the COVID period.

I urge the government and the House to accept it.
18:24
Baroness Boycott Portrait Baroness Boycott (Crossbench)
-
-
I rise to speak to amendment 502, B, and support Baroness Bennett's management. If Lord Young chooses to that vote I will support his amendment which I thought was very well argued. I'm deeply sympathetic to the Minister's handling of this bill, as schools are being asked to do semi-different things. It is a wide brief and coming up with something again at feels when we are the end of the bill, but this is about adaptation and mitigation around flooding and heat risks, just the summer we have seen schools have to close because of excess heat.

Where I live in Somerset school in Tiverton is flooding almost every year, the defences are very poor and my worry about it is that the government, if you look at our green and sustainable amendments, is really not taking the issue of what we need to do, in a lactation to the coming weather threats, seriously enough. So this is an amendment that you could call a stitch in time but it is also a stitch for tomorrow in the summer, before the summer, I tabled questions about how much information the Department held about the amount of loss learning time due to flooding and indeed due to heat stress and the documents came back saying that no adaptation measures were implemented, as it was addicted that not until 2050, that a Dacia could be lost to extreme heat levels.

That is a lot, it's also quite a long way ahead and had all the possibility of saying, let's kick this particular can down the road. I think that would be unwise to stop and so much in the climate change world is changing much faster than we anticipate, and the point is, things are already happening now. But that actual document did say that on the basis of the EEA analysis, 20% or 34% of respectively primary and secondary school holdings were at high risk, and 37 and 59% were at medium risk of surface water flooding right now.

So we are in a position where we know some but not all of the impact and we are indeed lacking a lot of knowledge about the impact of heat and what is an OK temperature to expect schoolkids to learn in and teachers to teach in. So my amendment would require the government to produce a safe and resilient schools plan which lays out how existing schools buildings will be consistent with net zero emissions not just become assistant to climate change but flooding and the overheating which are the byproducts of climate change which obviously is why we are pursuing net zero.

Importantly it would make existing government guidance on new, and this is the most important thing, new school buildings, introduced by the previous government, that they should be designed for a 2 rise, we are already at nearly 1 point, and future proofed for rising temperatures were also being built to adapt to climate risks. These two things seem fairly simple and I hope doable, and I would say that I would find it really hard to accept, given the current situation which is evident from the government's own papers that these are not real and expected risks which need to be addressed.

I would like to draw attention quickly to a report on about 60 London schools that was carried out a couple of years ago, at the behest of the mayor, which looked at what tailored actions they could take. A fade as part of the schools a read, 93% reported overheating as an issue that experienced in the last couple of summers. 78% said that overheating had a significant impact on learning and 43% experienced this multiple times, all continuously through the summer term.

It is great something was done and that the schools now know what they need to do but these measures have not actually been installed because unfortunately this cost money. This was just 60 schools out of the 30,000 that we have in England so we need a nationwide plan. It's absolutely not A1 size, I'm afraid this is the case where difference is important. We also need to realise that air- conditioning can never be the future. You cannot use excessive heating in the winter and excessive air-conditioning in the summer because we can't afford the energy, we are in an energy transition and it isn't workable long-term.

But you kinda look like shading windows from the outside, natural ventilation, you can have many more trees which is a good thing and lots of other respect, planted around schools. It will be a capital investment into a publicly owned infrastructure, make schools zillions, and we need to also think what the cost of inactions are. In response I have three specific questions. Would it be possible to ask schools list of questions about what their experiences have been about, say, the summer's and naturally warm weather? -- Unnaturally warm.

Could she take on the response for providing data on the success or school plans to help schools transitions? I know we are asking a lot but this is going to come and bite as very soon. And finally I would like to know if the Department has any time considered moving exams away from the hottest moment of the year because that is pretty tough year because that is pretty tough
18:30
Baroness Finlay of Llandaff Portrait Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (Crossbench)
-
-
I have a probing amendment in this group and really came about because it struck me that we need to be prepared to think of the unthinkable. They have then sadly some tragedies in different schools, in different places. I have been bus crashes, have been nice things, we know that the defibrillators on sports fields have saved lives by having a program that was rolled out. We know that auto injectors of adrenaline now that they are in schools has a spare autoinjector has been saving lives.

But I am not sure that children really do know how to cope with some of the life- threatening emergencies that can occur before emergency services arrived, particularly how to manage if the child seems to be bleeding out from a severe injury, some very simple measures that can be taken, how to manage choking if someone is choking on a bolus of food in the dining room. How to manage a chemical attack, I should say that my own grandson school, one is still still at school where there was a chemical attack on a pupil in the street that hit the news.

I was very struck many years ago when the same grandchildren were much younger when there are nursery where they were taught a very simple rhyme which is if there is a fire, shout, fire fire do not hire Hyde run outside will stop terribly simple, weak chances in the home with them but actually it was a really important lesson because things can be incredibly dangerous and can happen very fast. So the purpose of my amendment was really to probe as to the breadth with which we really are seriously taking some of the unthinkable things that could happen to our schoolchildren and making sure that schoolchildren and making sure that they are prepared for how they could respond in a way that does not further endanger them when there is really serious danger in front of them.

It is a probing amendment, it's not well drafted I know that. But I have felt that when we are going through such an enormously complicated piece of legislation putting so much onus on schools, you do have to think about the unthinkable.
18:33
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle Portrait Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party)
-
-
It's a pleasure to follow Baroness Finlay and to share her concern about the need to prepare pupils in this age of shot where we literally do not know what is around the corner. I have often spoken in your Lordships house about the need for first-aid education in schools, this amendment is broader than that but we need an education that prepares people for life not just exams. I note the fact that recently has been introduced into the driving licence test some basic questions about first-aid showing there is some recognition in the government of the need to act in the space.

I'm cheaply going to speak to my amendment 502YB and 502YK and thank Baroness Boycott for her support. 502YB which is a review of climate adaptation schools is very much fitting with the noble Ladies 502p but the noble Ladies amendment is focused largely on the physical fabric of schools, minus focused to a large degree on how schools behave and how they are arranged, it's more of a behavioural question. I note that UK Health Security Agency has published updated guidance for schools in earlier settings about heat, that allows schools to relax uniform policies in the heat, it suggests students could wear loose light-coloured clothing and hats with widebrimmed, stay in the shade as much as possible, sunscreen with high sun protection factors et cetera and says teachers should also encourage students to take off their blazers and jumpers.

All of that is in the terms of encouragement and suggestions. I would put to the Minister the government more broadly that actually we are a situation now particularly when we have so many schools you seem to have an unreasoning almost religious attachment to rigid uniform policies, that they should actually be rules say you must act keep your people safe. I note that the National Education Union suggests that 26degrees should be set as an appropriate place to identify additional measures, so let's make some royalty about taking some action protect our children.

On the broader point about climate resilience, Baroness Boycott referred to London London study, I'm going to refer to a London program which I think they have followed from that, climate resilient schools in 22/23 the Mayor of London took measures, funded measures in 100 schools to make them more resilient. When you look at the website this program has now ended. Surely we need a continuing ongoing program to make our schools more climate resilient. I come now to amendment 502YK about the prevention of the transmission of respiratory and other diseases in classrooms, in schools generally, I think it's interesting that I was looking at 502YH in the name of Baroness Kidron which talks about the statutory standards of filtering and monitoring systems in schools.

I thought this might be similar but no that's an amendment about computer viruses. About digital viruses. We have just had a very long debate focusing on those kinds of digital safety issues, but somehow even despite the COVID pandemic we have rather less focus, minus the only amendment sing on biological virus risks. You might call this the COVID amendments, and certainly I speak in the context where it is very clear that COVID is not over and there is a new variant stratospheric and spreading fast and raising levels of concern, if we think about that COVID situation for a second that means COVID is still spreading that means more and more people are not just becoming ill in the short-term but we know getting long COVID.

I'm going to quote the pulmonologist Anita Kane who has recently started an NHS long COVID clinic notes that there has been a refusal to acknowledge the problem of long COVID and the continuing problem, if you look at the history of the world's medical treatment of so- called chronic fatigue syndrome, chronic and suffer myelitis, it has been a refusal to acknowledge the issue of that broader post viral syndrome is the fact that people get ill for a long time. There was a study at the end of the last year the said after two years 70% of the children had shown long COVID were no longer display symptoms of long COVID.

Was the headline. That means of course that 30% of the children who had been diagnosed a couple of years ago with the long COVID still have long COVID and is still is affecting their life. That's something that we can't ignore in terms of COVID but all of course this is not just COVID amendment. Just because we've had a COVID pandemic is not going to have any impact at all on the risks, the continuing acute risks of a flu pandemic, something world has known very much of in the past.

I would also point out the issues around ventilation, about air filtration, they are also good for people concentration, they are good for general health to have fresh air in the classroom and we need to be able to look after the health of pupils and we know that, there is a direct question here to the Minister I will understand she wants to right to be later, in 2021 England spent £25 million providing all state funded schools and colleges with a portable CO2 monitor fairy to classrooms, there was further funding in November 2022 for the remaining 50% of classrooms.

The recommendation is that CO2 levels should be kept below 800 parts per million, indoor air at 600 to 800 parts per million is a very relatively good level of ventilation. Can the noble Ladies tell me now or in the future have any of those monitors are still in use and what kind of results they showing? showing?
18:40
18:41
Baroness Barran Portrait Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
This was a very diverse group of amendments turning first to amendment 5:02 AM table by Lord Young of Acton and Lord Brady of Altrincham. On the duty to keep schools open in person during civil emergencies, I think we can all agree on the importance of this principle and we saw very vividly during COVID that schools are both crucial centres of learning but also places of community and form an important part of the foundation of childhood.

So I absolutely support the principle behind the amendment that schools should remain open and the closure should only ever be considered in the most extreme circumstances. I'm slightly less clear looking at Baroness Longfield whether or not the Children's Commissioner is the right person to advise the government but it will be interesting to hear what the Minister has to say on that. Amendment 502p in the name of Baroness Boycott and Lord Gascoigne in the creation of a safe and resilient schools plan rightly highlights the importance of ensuring our school buildings are both resilient to climate change and responsible in terms of emissions may be a building can't be responsible those building it.

The previous government set out in our sustainability and climate change strategy for education in 2023 a commitment for all new school buildings be net zero in operation, designed for a 2degree rise in average global temperatures and future proofed for a 4degree rise. I'm slightly confused by the noble Ladies amendment because I assume the government will continue with those objectives but if that is changed maybe the Minister can clarify. Obviously in relation to future buildings that is a huge challenge not just in terms of funding but also in terms of the capacity and the building industry to actually deliver it or they may be Baroness Smith is working her magic in terms of construction and green skills.

Turning to amendment 502YB from Baroness Finlay on civil preparedness training for pupils, again I am not convinced there is a need for this particular amendment, there is already guidance and online training materials about how to respond to terrorist and other major incidents. So I am not sure that we need more than that, I think schools are pretty well equipped already. Finally the amendments in the name of Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle on firstly 502YB on the review of climate adaptation in schools, I have to say I don't think it's helpful to focus on just one aspect of school buildings as opposed to many other including the safety and security of the construction materials that they are built with.

I don't think that's helpful I think we should trust local authorities and school trusts to fulfil their responsibilities in relation to safety suitability and climate resilience. The noble Lady then went on I think to suggest maybe I am being harsh at this late hour, that the government should be more directive towards schools and relaxing school uniform, the idea that the Secretary of State is not only going to count many ties we have in school but is now going to instruct schools when to loosen them instruct schools when to loosen them Finally in relation to amendment 502, Y, K, schools have really clear guidance on ventilation is set out in the building bulletin 101 and so I don't think this amendment is needed.

Can I just also echo, if I may, the sentiments of the noble Baroness Baroness Smith of Malvern in terms of acknowledging the care, thought, the intellectual firepower, and a few hours of work that has gone into scrutinising this bill from across the House. I would also like to thank personally a number of external experts who have certainly shared their insights with me and taken great care and trouble to support on a number of our amendments.

We'll do this because we care about the children who this Bill seeks to support. We may not agree but we all care. agree but we all care.
18:47
Baroness Blake of Leeds Portrait Baroness Blake of Leeds (Labour)
-
-
Before I start, I just have a comment to make, the getting to the last group amendments here so apologies. These are all exceptionally important amendments that we need to consider and it is a rather strange grouping but there is a theme running through them and I would like to return to the noble Lord Lord Young of Acton first of course because his amendment led the group enquiry. And the thrust of this is that it would require schools to remain open to all pupils during civil emergencies unless the other place decides otherwise.

The thing I have to stress here is that every emergency is different and unpredictable. That is the nature of the beast we are talking about. I think the lessons that we all learnt, some of us more involved than others, we all learned that planning is best when it is agile and takes a whole system approach and is responsive to the emergency being faithful to I will never forget the chilling moment when I got a call from a director of education to tell us that a teacher had been murdered in one of our schools for example.

All of the emotions that brought in and all of the children in the school, the staff, the huge response that was required at the time. I have to say, I am acutely conscious of the impact that closing schools have on children and protecting children and young people in emergencies will always be a priority for this government. And can I commend the school leaders who did keep schools open during the pandemic, albeit for a limited numbers of pupils, but the vast majority of schools were open during that time and I think we should remember that.

They did extraordinary work to keep schools open and they receive very strong local support, in I have to say often a very conflicting and chaotic environment where directives were not clear, and that was an enormous not clear, and that was an enormous amount of confusion. During that whole period. I don't think it would be appropriate here to the findings of the COVID enquiry into the decisions made by the previous government. I think we must let the inquiry go into the real level of detail.

And it is of course timely that the children's module is starting the week after next. Of course we will all watch the evidence that is gathered through that process with great care and great insight. But there is an issue, and I would like to just raise it. Those of us who had to deal with the directives, there was a question. Why were zoos and themes a question. Why were zoos and themes Park and pubs open before schools? These are the things we need to get an understanding of.

School leaders already manage complex legal duties. No one would close a school likely. And government publishes guidance to help Taylor approaches for different emergencies. For health emergencies, nonstatutory guidance backed by public-health advice generally works well and the current framework enables this, without new legislation. DfE would work with a range of experts if faced with such decisions at scale again and will consider the role that the Children's Commissioner plays. I would be interested in hearing the views of the Children's Commissioner at this present moment in time, and whether in fact her office actually has the resource to take on the responsibilities that are being suggested in this amendment.

Just suggested in this amendment. Just also of interest, exercise Pegasus, UK's largest ever pandemic assimilation has started this week. It's a vital step in ensuring our systems, people and plans are ready for the next pandemic, whenever it might come. DfE officials are participating fully in this, as is Mr Gould in the other place. There is a Ministerial Statement on Pegasus that came out early in the week and I would recommend that we all look at the experience that they have and that they gather, that they gathered to that process.

Additionally, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care is looking carefully at legislation around future public health emergencies drawing on those lessons and ensuring that we are never again in that position of unpreparedness that we faced in March that we faced in March 2020. Turning to the amendment 580, P, tabled by the noble Lady Baroness Boycott, requiring new schools to be built to deliver net zero cooperative operation and be resilient for climate change action plans for schools to reach net zero and the adapter to be resilient to the impacts of climate change, I would like to confirm that the Department for Education already requires all sensory funding school projects to be net zero.

New schools are designed to be climate with to ATB degree -- to a 2 Mac four degrees rise. They need to deliver a greening factor of at least 35% to promote biodiversity. And to confirm this is ongoing. A DfE sustainability strategy produce an exportation for all school to develop a climate adaption plant, supported by a network of climate ambassadors who threw nine regional hubs provide free expertise and support to nursery schools and colleges to develop and deliver impactful climate Action Plan is.

The DfE has partnered with Great British Energy to support schools and decarbonise buildings through the installation of solar power and other energy efficiency measures such as installing LBD lighting. With regard to the three questions, posed by the noble Lady, I think everyone does know that taking exams at the hottest time of year can be extraordinarily difficult. It isn't always extremely hot at that time of year. Our climate is, as we all know, unpredictable at this moment in time but it is under in time but it is under consideration in terms of moving forward.

And I will have to get back to her on the other questions that she raised around data and information gathering. Turning to amendment 502, IA, the thoughtful amendment tabled by the noble Baroness Lady Finlay, who does speak with enormous experience and gave very appropriate examples, I think the way we feel about this is that teaching about emergencies has to be in an age-appropriate way and we must work in a sensitive way to ensure that overstating, not overstating risks and helping pupils conceptualise what they learn without causing alarm and I think that is a very delicate balance that we have to tread on this.

And there are particularly obvious safety measures that we can help to get across as she outlined. But there are areas where we need to rely on schools. I think they are exceptionally well placed to know how to plan, how to talk to pupils appropriately and there is guidance available to them including from the Department. In addition, Terrorism Act 2025 commonly known as Martin's law received Royal assent this year as we have heard. It will require certain premises, including educational settings, to prepare for potential events and be ready to keep people safe in the event of an attack.

As such, we think it would be confusing and unnecessary to accept this amendment whilst Martin's law is being introduced for the next 24 months. Selling sacramental 580, B, proposed by the noble Baroness Lady Bennett, stating the we need an additional 12 months, for increasing degrees of height images, and in Australia they are wearing hats and it's compulsory, kids having suncream is compulsory. Other parts of the world have moved ahead of us and we need to learn from other experiences as well.

And of course we understand the concern expressed in this amendment. But we have to be very careful that we can't add to the burden of the sector around collecting of the data that she suggests. And the review. I think we need to be very sensible to this and make sure that everything is done proportionately while making sure that children and young people are safe. The considerations set out in the amendment should be included in settings climate lands to be dealt with at a local level.

However for the preparedness of buildings and grounds we will develop new methods of that election in the future to help us understand the preparedness of schools for managing climate climate change emergencies. I don't think I need to say any more about the uniform provision. We issued guidance to support schools in devolving implemented uniform policies which states that schools should take a sensible approach to allow for exceptions to be made during extreme weather. For the suitably -- suitability of transport provision, we know that some schools provide transport.

Provide a on this, health and safety educational guidance sets out our advice on considerations necessary to plan, organise and risk assess educational visits. For the level of emergency planning to protect people health and, including relations or rules about maximum temperatures in classrooms, the workplace relations apply to schools and cover temperatures and in the workplace. This is supported by other legislation which requires schools to maintain their premises to ensure the health and safety and welfare of peoples, it is for individual schools to have a policy in place for emergency response and safeguarding.

Finally, turning to amendment 502, like a, also in the name of Eddie Baroness Bennett, this is looking at the rather vexed issues about ventilation and air cleaning in schools. Reducing the transmission of respiratory diseases as well as other measures to reduce transmission level diseases with annual reporting on progress. I absolutely as I say agree that good ventilation is vitally important. The Department already publishes guidance on ventilation which is consistent with expert advice given by the scientific prize recruit, Sage Mac, -- scientific advisory group, sage.

By extension other airborne infections. I'm sure airborne infections. I'm sure everyone will remember those shots of airborne particles circulating around the room without ventilation and the difference that opening windows and other factors actually windows and other factors actually We have previously funded provision of 700,000 carpenter monitors to over 45,000 education settings, enabling them to monitor and manage ventilation teaching spaces to support good levels of ventilation. I will have to write to the noble Lady to see if we can find how many of those are actually still in use and in operation, good point.

We also rolled out filtration based air cleaning units were schools that had identified poorly ventilated spaces which could not be resolved through simple measures like opening windows and doors. In addition we support other measures to reduce disease transmission including working closely with the agency to provide messaging on the importance of good respiratory and hand hygiene to reduce the spread of diseases, encouraging parents and carers to take up the offer to have their children vaccinated against preventable diseases like measles and flu.

I think that brings me to the end of my comments on this particular group of very important amendments but I would like to finish by echoing the comments of my noble friend the Minister in her word of thanks and for everyone that has taken part in the discussion so far on this bill, it has been extraordinary to listen to all of the expertise, the insight, and to actually share some of the thinking and ideas of how we move forward in semi-different aspects pertaining to the well-being of children and young people in our communities.

I would like to thank my noble friend for the very positive operation she has taken being open to discussions and so new members from around the House. Therefore for the reasons I've outlined we kindly ask noble Lords to withdraw their amendments. Lords to withdraw their amendments.
19:03
Lord Young of Acton Portrait Lord Young of Acton (Conservative)
-
-
I would just like to thank my noble friend Lord Brady for an excellent speech in support of amendments 502M and to thank the noble Lady Baroness Boycott, Lord Storey and Baroness Barran for their words of support and all I will say words of support and all I will say in reply to the noble Lady the ministers response, very thoughtful response, is yes of course the government needs to remain flexible in the face of emergencies but I think it also needs, there also need to be safeguards in place particularly when taking such momentous decisions and the safeguard of requiring the approval of Parliament seems like a fairly modest one.

With that I beg leave to withdraw the amendment standing in my name on the Order Paper.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The amendment is by leave withdrawn. Amendment 502N Baroness withdrawn. Amendment 502N Baroness Grey-Thompson not moved. Amendment 502p Baroness Boycott not moved. Amendment 502Q Lord Carlile not Amendment 502Q Lord Carlile not moved. Amendment 502 are not moved. Amendment 5025 Lord Carlile not moved. Amendment 502T Lord Carlile moved. Amendment 502T Lord Carlile knowledge. 502 you Baroness Grey- Thompson not moved. Amendment five Thompson not moved. Amendment five OTV Baroness Grey-Thompson not moved. Amendment 502W Lord Carlile not moved.

Amendment 502X Baroness Bennett not moved. Amendment 502 why Bennett not moved. Amendment 502 why Baroness Willis not moved. Amendment 502 why a Baroness Finlay not moved. 502 why be Baroness Bennett not 502 why be Baroness Bennett not made. 502 YC Baroness Barran not moved. 502 why de Lord Hampton not moved. 502 why de Lord Hampton not moved. 502 white Baroness Barran not moved. 502 white Baroness Barran not moved. Either to YF not moved. 502 YG Baroness Morgan of Cotes not moved.

Amendment 502YH Baroness Kidron not moved. Amendment 502 why I Baroness Kidron not moved. Amendment 502 why K Baroness Bennett not moved. Amendment 502 why our Baroness Bennett not moved. Amendment 502 why am Baroness Spielman not moved. Her men and five to YN Lord Wei not moved. Amendment 502 why be Lord Wei not moved. Amendment 502YQ not moved. Amendment 502 why are not moved. Amendment 52YS Baroness Barran not moved. Amendment 502 YG Baroness Barran not moved.

502 why you Baroness Barran not moved. 502 why the Baroness Barran not moved. 502 why W Baroness Barran not moved. Amendment 502 y- axis moved. 502 YY Baroness Barran not moved. 502 YY a Baroness Barran not moved. The question is the clause 63 stand part of the Belfast intent The "Contents" have it. The question is the clause 64 stand part of the bill stop As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it.

Amendment 503 not moved. -- Moved formally. Amendment 503 CrossFit five line 33 at the end insert the words on the marshalled List. The question is that the amendment be made. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. The question is the clause 65 as amended stand part of the bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. Moment 504 Lord Lucas not moved. Men and 504 a Baroness Barran not moved.

Five therefore be Baroness Barran not moved. 505 Baroness Finlay not moved. 505 a Baroness Barran not moved. 505 be Baroness Barran not moved. Five A5 C Lord Rosser not moved. 506 Baroness Malvern moved formally. Clause 66 page 1 to 419 insert the words is printed on the marshalled List. The question is the amendment is made. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. Amendment 506 a Baroness Fox not moved.

Five or six be Lord Watson not moved. Amendment 506C Lord Bellingham not moved. 560 Baroness Barran not moved. 507 Baroness Smith moved formally. Clause 6 is six page 124 line 22 about three and insert IIIa full stop question is that the amendment is made. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. Amendment 508 Baroness Barran not moved. 509 not moved. 510 Baroness Smith moved formally. Moved... 504 5042 504 2514...

510 to 514 unblock. The question is those amendment agree to. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. Withdrawn 514. Clause 66 as amended stand part of the bill stop As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. The "Contents" have it. That the title be the title of the bill. Clause 67 stand part of the bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content".

The "Contents" have it. Question is the title of the bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. That concludes the committee's proceedings on the The The Committee The Committee of The Committee of the The Committee of the Whole The Committee of the Whole House The Committee of the Whole House to which the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill was committed has gone

**** Possible New Speaker ****

through the same and has directed me to report it to your Lordships with amendments. I beg to move that the House do now adjourn. now adjourn.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

now adjourn. At the House do now adjourn. --
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page