Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Andrew Cooper Excerpts

Monday 1st December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jamie Stone]

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. That point was made in the consultation I had before this debate.

To continue, the Bill proposes wellbeing co-ordinators, structured mental health assessments and greater collaboration with community health services to embed wellbeing alongside literacy and numeracy as part of what every school must nurture. These are noble aims. Heaven knows, if a child is struggling mentally, they are not going to learn very much about trigonometry, are they?

We must approach the issues that campaigners have with the Bill. Previous Governments have spent decades giving academies and trusts more and more control, only for this Government to take it away again. Sometimes the best way to support wellbeing is to give schools freedom, not more top-down rules. In some instances, an attempt to standardise pay would mean giving our teachers in academies pay cuts. School groups have emphasised to me that the importance of local decision making cannot be underestimated.

[Andrew Cooper (Mid Cheshire) (Lab)]

Perhaps I have misunderstood, but I am sure that the Minister has clarified that the standardised pay across the sector should be a floor, not a ceiling. Can the hon. Gentleman confirm that that is his understanding too?

[Jamie Stone]

It will be interesting to see what the Minister says on that. Perhaps there is a little bit of misunderstanding on that issue. Let us leave it at that.

Teachers, parents and local authorities often know best what their children need—far more than we in Westminster ever could. They understand their communities and deserve to be trusted and, I believe, properly consulted.

The Bill also reaches into the world of home education, with measures such as a national register of children not in school, requirements for local authority consent to home school in certain cases and powers for councils to intervene if a home environment is deemed unsuitable.

--- Later in debate ---

[Andrew Cooper (Mid Cheshire) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Barker. I begin by thanking the petition organiser and all who engaged with it. Like many colleagues from across the House, I entered politics because I wanted to make sure that all children, regardless of their background or circumstances, had the opportunity to have the best start in life. I am sure that that is also the motivation for the majority of those who signed the petition, even if we might disagree that the Bill represents positive progress. Although the petition primarily addresses the school reform aspects of the Bill, it is important to underscore the significant child protection measures it contains that would be lost if the Bill were withdrawn as the petition proposes.

The measures broadly enjoy cross-party support and have been developed following what we have learned when things have gone tragically wrong. One of the most significant protections is the introduction of a single unique identifier for every child, an innovation that will transform how we monitor and safeguard children throughout their educational journey. With a unique identifier, schools, social services, the NHS and other agencies can securely share essential information, ensuring that no child slips through the cracks. Instead of scattering attendance records, safeguarding concerns and progress across disconnected systems, this approach brings everything together. For a child at risk, perhaps moving between schools or facing hardship at home, this identifier becomes a vital thread linking their past experiences to the support they need today.

Time after time, when a serious case review occurs and the resultant review looks at how it could have been prevented, featuring in there somewhere will be poor communication and a failure to connect the dots between agencies. The unique identifier is a key step towards preventing that from happening. Safeguarding cannot happen in silos. That is why the Bill creates multi-agency child protection teams, bringing together professionals from education, health, social services, mental health, housing and law enforcement. When the teams work collaboratively, risks are identified earlier and responses are more effective. For children living in unstable homes, struggling with mental health challenges or at risk of neglect, the joined-up approach can become life changing.

Safeguarding is only part of the ambition, however. True wellbeing depends not just on safety, but on opportunity. That is why the Bill also focuses on raising standards and strengthening support across schools. When education and wellbeing work hand in hand, every child has the chance to thrive academically and personally. The mission that lies at the heart of the Bill is to break the link between a child’s background and their future success. I believe that part 2 is fundamental to that mission. [Interruption.] The right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds) is welcome to intervene.

School reform is about creating the conditions for success. The introduction of regional improvement for standards and excellence teams will lead efforts to improve attendance and behaviour. The teams will provide the expertise and focus needed to tackle persistent challenges and support schools in creating environments where every child can flourish. The clear expectation is that schools employ qualified teachers and teach the national curriculum. Those are the foundations of a high quality education system, ensuring that every child, wherever they live, has access to excellent teaching and a broad, balanced curriculum.

Academy reform is about clarity and accountability. We have seen trusts that deliver exceptional support, helping schools raise standards and share expertise effectively. But we have also seen cases where that support has been absent, where performance has declined and communities have had little influence over improvement. The current system has grown fragmented and inconsistent. Structures alone do not guarantee success. What matters is the quality of teaching, the leadership and the support a child receives at home. The reforms will restore coherence and ensure that every school is part of a system focused on outcomes, not organisational labels. It is time to move beyond debates about governance and put standards at the heart of the conversation.

Other measures tackle barriers to learning head-on. Free breakfast clubs in every state-funded primary school will ensure no child starts the day hungry. Limiting branded items in school uniforms will ease cost of living pressures and promote inclusion.

[Gregory Stafford]

On the point about branded school uniforms, headteachers in my constituency have often bulk bought school uniforms through a supplier, so it can be more cost-effective to buy the uniform through the branded supplier than to buy it on the high street. Surely what the hon. Gentleman suggests could have a perverse outcome. Does he not think that if branded items can be bought at a cheaper cost, they would be better than buying off the peg?

[Andrew Cooper]

That is an interesting approach; it is a shame that has not been rolled out more widely. That is not the experience in the schools in my constituency. Across the population, the measures in the Bill will reduce costs for all. That is my view; the hon. Gentleman is welcome to his.

In short, the Bill is about ensuring that every child is safe, supported and given the chance to succeed. To withdraw it would be to turn away from that vision. Instead, we must commit to a future in which protection and education go hand in hand and no child is left behind.

--- Later in debate ---

[Bradley Thomas]

The hon. Gentleman makes an incredibly valuable point that none of us can disagree with in principle. Safeguarding has to be a foundation of the education system. The point is that the Bill attempts to provide a one-size-fits-all approach, but it does not quite strike the right balance. In the process, many families feel they are being stigmatised.

It is not disputed that stronger safeguards for vulnerable children are essential. It is a tragic reality that many children in abusive or neglectful homes are safer at school than they are at home, but to push all home educating families into that category is not only an insult to the vast majority of responsible, caring families who turned to home education because of failures in state schooling, but a potentially greater safeguarding risk, as it stretches already limited resources even further. Requiring local authorities continually to assess and investigate perfectly safe environments diverts time and resources from children in genuine danger and urgent need of protection. BBC reports reveal that local authorities are set to face a funding shortfall of more than £5.7 billion by 2026-27. The Children’s Commissioner has warned that this crisis poses a direct threat to the wellbeing of children and young adults.

Meanwhile, the number of school pupils with education, health and care plans surged by 71% between 2018 and 2024. Consequently, local authorities have amassed severe deficits in their high needs budgets, with the Institute for Fiscal Studies estimating a total shortfall of at least £3.3 billion at the end of last year. The Bill risks compounding the problem by stretching already overstretched resources, deepening financial pressures and weakening the fight against safeguarding risks. Thousands more children could be forced into placements within overcrowded schools, further exacerbating the crisis.

A Public Accounts Committee report published at the start of this year concluded that the special educational needs system is inconsistent, inequitable and not delivering in line with expectations, which inevitably undermines parents’ confidence in it. The Office for National Statistics predicts that 1.5 million children aged 10 to 15 experience in-person bullying. Which of the figures I have outlined offers any reassurance that children and young adults with complex needs or traumatic pasts would be properly cared for if removed from safe, personalised learning environments?

[Andrew Cooper]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to identify many of the reasons why parents choose to home educate. It quite often is as a result of bullying or an unmet special educational need. But under our current system, local authorities are not aware of the reason why somebody chooses to home educate. Under the Bill, parents will be required to provide that reason to local authorities. That might flag up to the local authority that there is a bullying problem at a school, or that there is a problem with the way special educational needs are dealt with. Does the hon. Gentleman accept that making that information available to the local authority is a plus that the Bill will deliver?

[Bradley Thomas]

The hon. Gentleman is right that it potentially could flag up those things; equally, it could be another burden on local authorities that are under-resourced to fulfil the requirements. It also could place a burden on parents and families that feels like stigmatisation.

The right balance must be struck between strengthening the safeguards for children and young adults and ensuring that the new legislation does not unintentionally harm thousands due to a one-size-fits-all approach. Rather than demonising all home educators and introducing measures that, in practice, will fail to improve many children’s wellbeing, the Government should redirect their focus towards improving support for SEND provision and children’s social services, ensuring better working relationships between home educators and local authorities, and fostering school environments that actively tackle bullying and rising classroom violence.

--- Later in debate ---

[Olivia Bailey]

I thank the hon. Member for his advocacy on this issue after the terrible events that led to Sara Sharif’s death. He has been doing an excellent job of that. I very much agree that the findings in the report on that case are appalling. The Government are taking them extremely seriously and will continue to work with local authorities to make sure that children are kept safe.

Lastly, the Bill helps to ensure consistently high standards in our schools. If I may quote the right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds) , we are indeed “striving for academic excellence”. Through our reforms to the academy system, we will give every family the certainty that they will be able to access a good local school for their child, delivered through excellent teaching and leadership, a rich, broad and high-quality curriculum and a pay floor for all teachers. We are designing a school system that supports and challenges all schools, allowing them to collaborate, innovate and drive excellence.

The hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross talked about the issues raised by Michelle Zaher and the hon. Member for Twickenham talked about evidence. The Bill is built on a robust evidence base that the Government have taken time and care to produce. The children’s social care measures in the Bill build on extensive consultation over the last few years in response to three reviews calling for a transformation of children’s social care.

Despite the many strengths and practices that have driven improvements across our school system, including transformational changes in phonics, professional development and strong multi-academy trusts empowering schools to collaborate and innovate, the fact is that the school system is not working well enough for all children. Standards vary widely and there is a stark contrast between the experiences of children in the best and worst schools.

The hon. Member for Bromsgrove talked about the children not in school register. Every child has the right to a safe and suitable education, whether they are educated at school or otherwise. We recognise that parents have a right to home educate and we know that many parents work hard to provide a suitable education for their children. Local authorities must identify children who are not in school and are not receiving a suitable education, but that existing duty is undermined by parents having no obligation to inform their local authority that they are home educating.

Statutory registers of children not in school, along with duties on parents and out-of-school education providers to provide information, will support local authorities to identify all children not in school in their area, including those not receiving a suitable education or at risk of harm, and to take action where that is the case. This was raised earlier, but crucially, parents will also be able to access tailored advice and information from local authorities, thanks to the new duty on local authorities to provide support should parents request it.

The hon. Member for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos) raised concerns about the single unique identifier and the information-sharing duty. For too long, poor information sharing has been identified as a contributory factor to serious child safeguarding incidents. As outlined in “Keeping Children Safe, Helping Families Thrive”, we are taking two important steps in the Bill to improve how services share information. First, we are introducing an identifier system for children to end misconceptions about the legal barriers to sharing information for the purposes of safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children. Alongside that, we are piloting the use of the NHS number as a SUI, starting with Wigan local authority. The pilot phase allows us to test the approach in practice, understand the implications fully and determine whether it should be mandated via future regulations.

[Andrew Cooper]

The right hon. Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis) raised concerns about the General Medical Council’s view on this. Is the Minister aware that the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health is advocating the use of the NHS number? Is she therefore aware that there is a divergence of views in the medical community on this point?

[Olivia Bailey]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that useful contribution to the debate.

I am conscious of time, so I will conclude by once again thanking the hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross for presenting this debate. I also thank Members across the Chamber for an excellent debate and for their thoughtful contributions this afternoon. I would like to recognise the tireless efforts of schools, local authorities and the many organisations that champion children’s wellbeing every day. The Bill will put more money back into the pockets of parents, reform our children’s social care system, safeguard vulnerable children and drive rising standards in all our schools. As we continue the passage of this transformational Bill, our focus will continue to be on breaking down the barriers to opportunity and ensuring that every child is safe.