Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Earl of Effingham Excerpts

Thursday 1st May 2025 Lords Chamber

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

My Lords, I thank the Minister for the comprehensive way in which she has set out the purpose of this key legislation. His Majesty’s Official Opposition welcome the Government’s ambition to protect children and ensure that they have the best opportunities in life, regardless of any challenges they may have faced during their childhood.

As your Lordships’ House is aware, this Bill comprises two halves. While both parts focus on the well-being and future of children across the country, there are some real and distinct differences between them. The former seeks to improve the children’s social care system. Noble Lords know that outcomes for children in the care system remain stubbornly poor, despite efforts from repeated Governments to improve them. Part 1 includes many elements that were recommended by the Independent Review of Children’s Social Care, commissioned by the last Government and published in 2022. As noble Lords are aware, it was ably led by the now honourable Member for Whitehaven.

There are areas in Part 1 where we will seek to probe, develop and clarify the practical implementation of the Bill, but, in the round, the importance of this part is recognised and the need for legislation is understood. It is a huge responsibility to do one’s collective best to represent the interests of children and young people who have been so disadvantaged through no fault of their own.

In doing so, we will focus on areas where we think the Bill could be strengthened, including support for kinship carers in particular and foster carers more broadly. We are keen to see support for care leavers be as effective as possible. We will encourage the Government to consider what support can be given to mothers who have already had one or more children removed from them by the local authority. We will press the Government to improve the protections for children deprived of their liberty—some as young as seven; a truly chilling thought. We will press for greater clarity on the implementation on family group conferencing and seek an explanation for the approach the Government are adopting to the introduction of a unique child identifier.

More broadly, we remain sceptical about the Government’s approach to the regulation of children’s homes and fostering agencies. We fear that this will result in more bureaucracy and no change in the supply picture. Given that research by Ofsted showed that up to 50% of children in children’s homes had a foster placement specified on their care plan, there is a pressing need to address the fundamental issues which limit the number of foster carers. We are aware that many organisations, including the Children’s Commissioner, have called for childcare and education agencies to be full partners in local safeguarding arrangements. We anticipate that, on many of these issues, we will be probing the Government, alongside noble Lords from all sides of the House.

It would be fair to say that we cannot share the same enthusiasm and support for the second part of the Bill, which relates to schools. We believe that the measures in this part of the Bill simply will not provide the best possible education for our children. If passed, these elements of the Bill will override years of cross-party support and will reverse the very system that has seen English children move up the PISA rankings across the board in reading, science and maths. This Bill risks undermining the overwhelming consensus of the last 20 years on the benefits that come from giving greater autonomy to local schools and trusts, while having high standards of transparency and accountability. It is this system that has seen English schoolchildren become the best in the western world at both reading and maths. To change this without clear evidence to justify it is both serious and risky.

We foresee far-reaching and negative consequences arising from some of the provisions in the second half of the Bill, and we are not alone in this view. The Confederation of School Trusts is very concerned about the provisions which seek to remove the academy freedoms that have so greatly improved our education system. One only need look at the contrast with Scotland and Wales, which have not adopted the English reforms, to see the evidence in stark relief. As His Majesty’s Government themselves did when in opposition, we will respectfully explore, question and, in some cases, challenge outright.

Let me begin with the area about which we have the greatest concerns: the clauses relating to academies. These are the most significant, as they seek to undo the progress made during the last two decades. In 2024, academies represented 80% of secondary schools and nearly 43% of primary schools. For His Majesty’s Government to introduce such wide-ranging and radical changes without support from the sector does not make sense. We respectfully urge the Government to listen to the voices from all around your Lordships’ House, as they did in the other place, to make improvements to the Bill on the pay and conditions of academy teachers.

Academies have been at the forefront of fostering innovation in our school system; they have led the turnaround of some of the most challenging schools in this country. I know that the noble Lords, Lord Harris of Peckham, Lord Agnew of Oulton, Lord Fink and Lord Nash, have all been involved in doing this difficult and crucial work, as has the noble Lord, Lord Young of Acton, in relation to innovation in opening new free schools. The Children’s Commissioner has also raised concerns about the restriction of academy freedoms. We hope that your Lordships’ scrutiny of His Majesty’s Government will allow the time needed to consider the importance of these expert voices. None of this is to suggest that improvements could not be made to the current system of regulation of our schools, but a forward-looking, positive and aspirational vision for all our schools appears to be lacking in this Bill.

The Bill also fails to introduce a ban on the use of smartphones in schools. Although the previous Government’s guidance to schools on banning smartphones was a positive first step, it is not enough. Only 11% of schools have an effective ban in place. Scores of scientific studies have linked both better mental health and school attainment to removing smartphones from classrooms. We recognise that this is not universally welcomed by head teachers, but we are most concerned that, in this case, we should use the precautionary principle when dealing with the mental health of children. I am very much looking forward to the valuable contribution that the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron, will make today, following the excellent debate she led on this subject last November.

There are also concerns that the breakfast clubs being introduced by the Bill will have practical issues, and we will seek to table probing amendments. Of the 750 schools involved in the early adopter programme, 79 have already dropped out. We understand that some have given a funding shortfall as their reason for leaving. The CEO of the Warrington Primary Academy Trust said that the scheme is in danger of falling flat because of it. There are certainly practical issues which need to be addressed before the scheme can be rolled out nationwide. It would be appreciated if the Minister took the opportunity to explain in her closing remarks the Government’s position on this drop-out rate.

I turn to the proposal in the Bill to introduce laws governing the specific number of school uniform items a school can require a child to have. We worry that this approach could backfire, with children feeling under pressure to wear the latest fashion, which is actually more expensive than their uniform. This blanket approach does not allow schools to provide free uniform, or account for them providing it at a discount. It can be more expensive to buy unbranded items. We will explore this further in Committee.

Protecting the well-being and education of children is essential to the future of the country, to economic growth and to reducing the burden on the NHS. His Majesty’s Official Opposition accept that some parts of the Bill form part of the Government’s manifesto commitments, and we will seek to ensure that these areas work well in practice.

Today’s list of speakers reads like a Who’s Who of education experts. On our Benches alone we have three former Secretaries of State for Education, and the noble Lord, Lord Harris of Peckham, is also present. To quote the media, what earns the noble Lord hero status is that this Conservative Peer

“has done more to help working-class children than any Labour politician since Attlee and Bevan.”

I am also very much looking forward to hearing the maiden speeches of the noble Lords, Lord Biggar and Lord Mohammed of Tinsley.

It would be impossible to get all the speakers today in a room together at the same time were it not for your Lordships’ House. There are aspects of this Bill on which we hope the Government will listen to the collective experts sitting all around your Lordships’ House—including on their own Benches—who have been involved in the leadership of multi-academy trusts. We hope that the Government will think again, because surely, children deserve no less.

Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Bill [HL]

Earl of Effingham Excerpts

Consideration of Commons amendments and / or reasons
Wednesday 30th April 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Storey (LD)]

My Lords, it is not often that you are involved in a Bill and everyone agrees what the outcome should be and realises that the issue is more important than anything else. I commend the Government for coming into office and realising straightaway that, if we are to get economic growth, we need the skills to provide it. The noble Lord, Lord Aberdare, was quite right to say that it is not only about having a set of skills and saying that this is what we as a nation need; we need it regionally as well. The needs of the north-east will be very different from those of, for example, the north-west or the south-east.

I hope we can now get on with the job of delivering this. I thank those with whom we have worked closely: the noble Baroness, who has jetted back from Australia, where she has picked up some ideas on skills; and the noble Lord, Lord Aberdare, who has been stalwart in bringing us together. I particularly thank the Minister for always giving of her time to listen to us—to both disagree and agree. Finally, I must not forget to thank the Bill team for their work, and Adam Bull in the Lib Dem Whips’ Office.

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

My Lords, I thank the Minister and all noble Lords who have been involved in the passage of the Bill. His Majesty’s Official Opposition remain concerned that the Government have removed the amendments in the name of my noble friend Lady Barran. Other noble Lords also expressed concerns that Skills England will be overly focused on administration, resulting in it being unable to prioritise its central strategic tasks. By allowing a year to pass between the creation of Skills England and the abolition of IfATE, we would create sufficient time for the effective transfer of functions and ensure that Skills England could take on its role successfully.

We would suggest that it is a mistake for the Government to ignore these concerns. In both your Lordships’ House and the other place, there has been cross-party support on this issue, and we cannot hide our disappointment that the Government remain unconvinced on this focal point. We on these Benches are worried that the transition period as planned will have a damaging impact on apprentices.

At the same time, we recognise that this is a manifesto commitment. We will, of course, while challenging constructively, work with His Majesty’s Government to progress their skills programme, and we do not intend to push this issue any further. We will continue to remain vigilant on the transition to Skills England and ensure that it is working for the very people it aims to help. Should our concerns increase, we will endeavour to raise them in your Lordships’ House. It is now up to the Government to ensure that Skills England is able to run effectively and does not become overwhelmed with the weight of the accreditation and assurance process.

We are indeed grateful that His Majesty’s Government have listened to some of the key points that have been raised across your Lordships’ House, and the Bill has been strengthened accordingly. A report on the exercise of functions conferred or imposed on the Secretary of State has now been included, which is important for accountability. The Government have listened to the concerns about the Secretary of State preparing apprenticeship plans and assessments, and will, as such, publish information about the relevant matters that have been taken into account.

We thank the Minister for her engagement throughout consideration of the Bill, and we thank all noble Lords who have made such valuable contributions and worked constructively on its scrutiny.

[Baroness Smith of Malvern (Lab)]

My Lords, I am grateful for the support of noble Lords and the continued challenge of those who have made the Bill better during its passage through this House.

On whether Skills England is ready, I reassure noble Lords that it is ready to take on the functions currently exercised by IfATE, where appropriate. Detailed transition plans are in place to ensure continuity throughout the transition. There will be continuity in staff and team structures, which will ensure a smooth operational transition and maintain vital links to employers. Staff are eager to contribute their expertise and valuable insights, to feed into Skills England’s broader purpose from day one.

Universities: Free Speech

Earl of Effingham Excerpts

Tuesday 1st April 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Smith of Malvern (Lab)]

The relationship between the functions that the noble Baroness outlines is not necessarily unusual for regulatory bodies. I am sure that the Office for Students in particular thinks carefully about it. Obviously, there has been a lot of thought on the role of the Office for Students with respect to freedom of speech, and I am sure that it is continuing to consider that.

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

My Lords, His Majesty’s Government have rightly acknowledged the importance of increased defence spending. Given media reports of intimidation towards defence industries and the Armed Forces at higher education recruitment events, we must ask the Minister this: what steps are the Government taking to ensure that such events take place without issue?

[Baroness Smith of Malvern (Lab)]

It is wholly wrong if those events are not able to take place on our campuses or if there is interference in the very important research that our universities are taking part in. That is primarily the responsibility of the higher education institutions themselves, but I am absolutely clear that that is an important part of what should be happening in our universities.