Neurodiversity: Ministerial Role

Adam Dance Excerpts

Wednesday 11th November 2026 Westminster Hall

[Graham Stuart (in the Chair)]

I will call Adam Dance to move the motion; I will then call the Minister to respond. I remind Members that they may make a speech only with prior permission from the Member in charge of the debate and from the Minister. As is the convention for 30-minute debates, there will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up. We will still have to finish strictly on time at 11.30 am.

[Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the potential merits of appointing a Minister for Neurodiversity.

About 20% of the population are what we would call neurodivergent, yet there is no one person working across Government Departments to ensure that the needs of this 20% are considered. Neurodivergence is an umbrella term that describes people who think, learn, process, inform and interact with the world differently from the normal. It captures both medical and non-medical differences, including attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, autism, dyslexia and so many others. I myself am very neurospicy, as I call it. Although each of those traits and learning difficulties is unique, we use the term not only because there are overlapping traits but because people with ADHD and autism, for example, share a lot of challenges with their health, school and work.

For years, the main challenge when it comes to Government has been an unacceptable lack of understanding of neurodivergence. Policymakers just have not got it and have made life harder, not better, for that 20% of the population. In fact, that lack of understanding is why I got involved in politics in the first place, campaigning to stop the closure of the youth club that helped to save my life when I was struggling with severe dyslexia, ADHD and severe bullying. It just made no sense to me that the Government and the then Conservative-run Somerset county council could not understand the damage they were doing by cutting youth service funding by 100% in Somerset, particularly for neurodiverse people.

Even after we saved my youth club, the feeling that decision makers just do not understand has followed me through politics. It is what drove me to stand for election and to be in this place today. For far too long, it has felt like the world has been set up by someone else, and like neurodiverse people are an afterthought.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for all that he does and for how he has been able to overcome these difficulties. Many neurodivergent people report being misunderstood by those around them, leaving them feeling isolated and without adequate support. A dedicated Minister for neurodiversity could help drive a more targeted approach. Does he agree that appointing a dedicated Minister would help to prevent neurodivergent people from falling through the cracks and would ensure that they receive the understanding that they very much deserve, which would help them in their lives?

[Adam Dance]

I completely agree, and I thank the hon. Member for bringing that up. I will come to lots of those points later.

Coming into this Parliament with a new group of MPs and a new Government, I was really hopeful. I thought we would get things done across the parties. There are some fantastic MPs and Ministers who really do get it, but there are still far too many in power who are just as clueless as the Tories were when they tried to shut my youth club. I have been in meetings where Ministers have suggested that ADHD is just a mental health illness, which is not the case, and in meetings and debates where MPs and others have leaned into toxic narratives about ADHD or autism being a myth. While these seem like lots of insignificant things, when they are put together, we get a culture that leads to policy that is not just bad but damaging for neurodiverse people.

In fact, in many ways I think we have gone backwards from when my generation was at school. Under-investment in diagnosis and support pathways in the NHS means that people face a two-year minimum wait for ADHD and autism assessments if they are lucky, and way too many miss out on support and treatment.

A whole generation have gone without any identification or support at all. Research by the charity The Hidden suggests that between 250,000 and 600,000 autistic adults over the age of 50 in England have never been diagnosed. The education system is not set up to support neurodiverse people. Years of under-investment in local councils, which are for some reason responsible for special educational needs and disabilities support, has led to a crisis in Somerset, where more than 85% of children wait 20 to 52 weeks to get their education, health and care plan implemented, if they are lucky, and so many others are going without support at all.

Meanwhile, vocational, technical and creative pathways are being shut down, and there is too much focus on exams. Spelling, punctuation and grammar marks in non-English exams just punish you for having a learning disability. A lack of investment in training and support for teachers has seen them struggling to support pupils or just not understanding them altogether.

Arm’s length bodies are just as bad. Recently removed training material from Ofsted on Prevent suggested that a person with autism is more likely to be a dangerous extremist because they may develop special interests, which is insane. My assistant’s younger sister is autistic; her special interest is frogs. How does that make her more likely to be a terrorist? Guidance like that means that people with autism are more likely to get those types of referral; it does not address the factors that actually lead to radicalisation.

It is not just about healthcare or schools. The failures spread to the workplace. You are 80% more likely not to be in education, employment or training if you have SEND. There is still too little understanding of how to adjust and make the most of neurodiverse people’s skills. Sadly, what all this means is that you are far more likely to end up in prison or taking your own life if you are neurodivergent. Without the support I had, that would have been me.

What is most frustrating of all is that none of the work across Government to solve this is joined up well enough. You do not stop struggling with dyslexia, ADHD, autism or any other neurotype difference when you leave school, believe me. Being neurodivergent means that you will experience our education, health, justice, work and pension and Government systems differently for your whole life. That is why we have so many campaigners out there fighting for support for neurodivergent people: because after years of terrible policy, too many people feel like I did as a young person, which is that decision makers just do not get it and cannot be trusted.

A Government are supposed to serve all their people, and yet we are failing to provide representation for 20% of the population. Think about it like this, Mr Stuart: if I owned a landscaping company and ignored the needs of 20% of my customers by using plants that they were allergic to and making it impossible for them to get around their gardens, I would rightly be out of business. The Government will probably not go out of business—well, I hope not, at least as long as Liz Truss is not allowed anywhere near the Government again—but their failure to properly represent the needs of 20% of the people they were elected to represent is more than just a policy failure. It is damaging our democracy.

What we need in Government is someone whose job it is to listen, to understand and to represent the needs of neurodiverse people. It is not about special treatment, but about making sure that politics—big and small, national and local—do not unfairly impact neurodivergent lives, as they so often do. Given all the big challenges in Government, considering the appointment of a neurodiversity Minister could not come at a better time. Our health service is being restructured, our local integrated care boards are being merged, while their budgets are being cut, and our SEND system is undergoing generational change. The Milburn and Timms reviews will see an overhaul of work and benefits support, local government is being totally restructured, and our justice and prison system is undergoing a serious overhaul as it faces collapse.

Despite the fact that these are the systems that educate, diagnose, support and rehabilitate neurodivergent people, no one in Government is currently responsible for neurodivergent people through this transition. We all know what institutions, politics and Government are like: without someone with authority in the room making the case for neurodivergent people’s needs, they will be drowned out and forgotten. That cannot be allowed to happen any more. Ultimately, that is why we need a Minister in the Cabinet Office for neurodiversity.

A Minister for neurodiversity is obviously no silver bullet. No one policy solution will fix this, but what we need is one officer holding responsibility for making sure we join up all the different solutions: someone who is working across Government and is able to hold Government Departments, bodies and local authorities to account, but also someone who can co-ordinate and help Government bodies to get it right. It is not that there is some evil group of neurodivergent-hating elite we need to get rid of. Well, I hope not; that would be way too easy. There are so many fantastic people across Government, at all levels, who want to do right by neurodivergent people, but right now our institutional culture across Government just does not give policymakers the space or the tools to consider neurodivergent people properly.

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

I congratulate the hon. Member on securing this important debate. I recognise that our society and Government are set up in a neurotypical way, as opposed to looking at divergence. I congratulate the Government on all the work they are doing around young people, but we know that we need to look at a life course. I support the hon. Member’s call to ensure that we have a cross-cutting mainstream focus on neurodivergence, but also that we embed that into the policies and the structures of our society.

[Adam Dance]

I thank the hon. Member for her intervention; I totally agree with you—

[Graham Stuart (in the Chair)]

Order.

[Adam Dance]

Sorry—I totally agree with the hon. Member. It is really good to have cross-party support. Just as the Prime Minister has argued that we need mayors as a force to drive change in local authorities’ areas, we need one person in Government to drive positive change on neurodiversity policy.

You are probably thinking, “Adam, that is all great, but how are you actually going to do it?” To put it simply, I am asking the Government to do three things: first, to make way for a new Minister by restructuring current posts or amending the Ministers of the Crown Act 1975 to expand the number of Ministers we can have; secondly, to give the new Minister funded statutory powers, by presenting Parliament with a cross-departmental strategy for neurodiversity that the Minister would be responsible for implementing, because this does not work if the Minister does not have teeth; and thirdly, to appoint a Minister for neurodiversity, which is probably the most difficult and political part of the whole process.

That is obviously easier said than done, but, as with most things, the answer is there: it just requires political willpower. Look at the new Minister for Artificial Intelligence post in the Cabinet Office. We see this time and again with Government: we are told, “Oh, that is too complicated,” or, “Oh, that wouldn’t be practical,” but then the public kick up a fuss, and, suddenly, it is not too difficult and can actually be done rather quickly. Let us not forget that this is about 20% of the public.

Obviously, though, the Minister today cannot snap her fingers and promise to do this—I would love it if she could. That is just not how this works, and I get that. Instead, I ask the Minister to commit today to starting the process by having civil servants review cross-departmental policy on neurodiversity and the merits of a neurodiversity Minister, and then to meeting me and campaigners to talk through the findings with us and hear our suggestions in more detail.

I know that this proposal is ambitious, but it is the lack of ambition on neurodiversity policy that has got us into this mess in the first place. It is only with bold action that we are going to make a difference, because I do not want to live in a country where the next generation of neurodiverse kids feel as I did when they tried to shut my youth club, and where decision makers just do not get it and just do not care. I thank everybody for listening.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sally Jameson]

I agree. The hon. Member for Yeovil is a role model for many thousands, possibly millions, of people out there who might think that their neurodiversity could hold them back from office: he is showing that that is absolutely not the case. He is using his role in Parliament to make sure that these issues are brought to the forefront of Government, the media and so on. I congratulate him on doing that, both today and more widely in this place.

Supporting people who are neurodiverse is of critical importance to the Government. The hon. Member is right to say that we do not have a Minister solely responsible for neurodiversity. He will know that ministerial portfolios and the machinery of government more generally are matters exclusively for the Prime Minister himself, but I want to assure him that this is a core focus of Government policy across Departments. I would actually expect—as I am sure Ministers and people more widely would as well—that neurodiversity and the issues that affect neurodiverse people need to be woven into all Government policy across all Departments, regardless of whether there is a Minister. We should expect that and hold the Government and ourselves accountable to ensure that that is happening.

The particular issues raised today are overseen by the Secretaries of State for Health and Social Care, for Education, and for Work and Pensions. Those Secretaries of State and their Departments work closely together, and the Government continue to work on the needs of people who are neurodiverse.

The independent review into the prevalence and support for mental health conditions, ADHD and autism found that ADHD and autism referrals and waiting lists for diagnosis have “risen dramatically”. We want to ensure that people of all ages get the right support and, crucially, get it at the right time, without having to wait for a diagnosis before they can get access to help.

The Government recognise that waits for ADHD and autism assessment remain too long and have a huge impact on individuals and their families. We all know that from our constituency inboxes.

[Adam Dance]

One of my projects last year was a ten-minute rule Bill for universal screening, which I have been working on and talking to Ministers about. It would screen everyone at primary school to pick up their neurodiversity. Does the Minister think we can reopen the discussion on that?

[Sally Jameson]

I cannot make a decision on that here, but I will take it back to the relevant Departments—I suspect that is a question for the Department for Education—and ask that they have another look at the hon. Member’s ten-minute rule Bill.

Support is too often organised around diagnosis, rather than people’s needs and circumstances. People seeking help increasingly present with overlapping needs that do not simply fit into a single diagnosis. Better understanding of that is important. As set out in the Government press release following the independent review, we are moving to a more needs-led model, providing earlier access to information, support and appropriate intervention based on individual needs and circumstances without and before a diagnosis, while also improving timely access to high-quality diagnostic assessment when required.

Moving on to the SEND reform element, which the hon. Member for Yeovil touched on, we remain committed to ensuring that every child has the best start in life with accessible and local support in their community and ending the need for families to fight for help. Since consulting on our SEND reforms, we have worked with partners across education, health and local government to build on the foundations for long-term improvement.

Funding allocations and guidance that have been previously announced include £4 billion of investment to enhance inclusive provision across early years, schools, colleges and local authorities. Alongside that, there is another £3.7 billion in capital funding between 2025 and 2030, which will create 60,000 new specialist places. Through local SEND reform plans, we are ensuring every area delivers targeted local support. We will publish the consultation response in due course and will introduce legislation on this at the earliest opportunity.

As announced in the King’s Speech, the education for all Bill will be introduced in this parliamentary Session to make mainstream education more inclusive and ensure all children get the right support early on. The Bill will help children and young people and is backed by more than £200 million for SEND and inclusion training. New requirements in the SEND code of practice will ensure that settings train all staff in SEND and inclusion more widely.

[Adam Dance]

That £200 million is welcome, but it is very little money per school or per teacher. It is a good start, but we need to go further. I have one more question, while I am on my feet: will the Minister agree to meet me to discuss a neurodiversity Minister in the Cabinet Office?

[Sally Jameson]

I will ensure that someone meets the hon. Member. I am not sure whether that meeting will be with me; I need to clarify responsibility and portfolio on that, because it is technically the Prime Minister who would appoint the Minister for neurodiversity, but I will come back to the hon. Member on that and arrange an appropriate meeting.

The hon. Member touched a bit on employment and neurodiversity, though I appreciate there is more to be said. It is incredibly important, particularly as we await the Milburn review and things we will be doing more broadly to support the population. Good work, good health and wellbeing for neurodivergent people is incredibly important. In 2025, the DWP launched an independent panel of academics with expertise and lived experience of neurodiversity to advise us as a Government on boosting awareness and inclusion in the workplace.

The panel considered why neurodivergent people often have poor experiences in the workplace and have a low overall employment rate. We welcomed the publication of the report by the expert academic panel on neurodiversity, alongside the Government response, on 2 October. The report highlights the valuable contribution that neurodivergent people make to our workforce and sets out recommendations to improve their recruitment, retention and progression in the workplace. Neurodivergence should not hold anyone back from achieving their potential in their workplace, or in their career more widely, as the hon. Member has shown. Our response sets out our work across Government with our stakeholders to increase work opportunities, and our continuing work focusing on needs-led support and inclusive workplace design to help employers better attract and retain talent.

We have also announced a training package, backed by £200 million of new funding, to ensure that teachers, educators, teaching assistants, support staff and leaders across early years, school and, importantly, post-16 settings can be trained to support pupils with SEND and neurodivergence and to help them with employment readiness.

I am conscious of time, but I will touch on the inclusive mainstream fund, which forms part of the Government’s commitment to building a more inclusive mainstream education across the country. More than £500 million per financial year over the next three years will equip schools and, importantly, colleges, as well as early years settings, with up-front funding to help them to have a more inclusive design. Building on the consultation on SEND reform, the fund addresses historical gaps in early support to help to ensure that every child and young person benefits from high-quality adaptive teaching. Settings can use the IMF alongside core funding allocations to strengthen inclusion for all pupils. It focuses on a needs-led approach rather than a rigid set of boxes that need to be ticked. It will allow teachers, colleges and employers to focus on what the people they work with need.

The independent review led by Peter Fonagy has challenged us to think differently about supporting people with mental health and neurodivergent needs. We want people of all ages to have the right support at the right time without waiting for a diagnosis before they can access help. Through our forthcoming mental health strategy, we will set out how we will move towards earlier needs-led support and better integration between mental health and neurodevelopmental pathways. We want to provide earlier access to information, support and appropriate interventions based on individual needs, while improving timely access to high-quality diagnostic assessments when required.

I end by repeating the Government’s commitment to support people living with neurodiverse conditions. I again thank the hon. Member for Yeovil for securing a debate on this important issue. I know that he will continue to raise this issue, not just in proposing a Minister for neurodiversity, but in championing the needs of the neurodiverse population and what they require from the Government to ensure that they can be successful and thrive, not just in early years and school, but in higher education, employment and, later in life, in social care. I will ensure that everything the hon. Member raised in the debate lands with the relevant Government Departments. I will take away his request for a meeting to discuss further how we can have better representation in Government. We are committed to ensuring that the right services are available at the right time for the right people; our support for that will not waver.

Question put and agreed to.